Paradise on Earth

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
tam
Prodigy
Posts: 4188
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Contact:

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
JehovahsWitness wrote: WHO ARE THE SHEEP IN THE SHEEP AND GOAT PARABLE?
tam wrote:

Matt 25 (sheep and goats) is identifying those who are cast out (the goats) and those who are invited in (the sheep). Both the sheep and the goats are people of the nations (not Christian).
Bold MINE

PLEASE NOTE There is not a single passage in the bible where Jesus ever uttered the words in bold.

Please note there is not a single passage in the bible where Christ ever utters the words (or even teaches about):

- "uanointed christians"

- "christians with an earthly hope versus christians with a heavenly hope"

- "christians who are not my brothers or my Bride"

- "disciples (or Christians) who must not eat or drink of my flesh and my blood"



BUT:


1 - Every example we have in what is written are of Christians who are anointed with holy spirit and who are part of the Church which is the Body of Christ, the Bride.

There is no example or teaching of a "non-anointed Christian who is not a brother of Christ".


2 - Every example we have in what is written are that all the disciples are to eat the bread which means the body of Christ and drink the wine which means the blood of Christ.

Christ did not limit who was permitted to partake to only a sub-group of Christians. He did not forbid another sub-group of Christians to partake. His words state just the opposite.

He also told the apostles to teach the disciples to obey everything that He had commanded them, the apostles (Matt 28:20). If Christ commanded the apostles to eat and to drink, then they were to teach the disciples (anointed or not) to obey that command as well.

(The apostles themselves had not even been anointed with holy spirit on the night that Christ instituted the evening meal. So to teach that one has to be anointed before obeying this command of Christ is doubly wrong.)



**


You keep posting as if the fault lies with me, but what I shared, as I have learned from my Lord (Christ Jaheshua), is supported in what is written (both in example and in teaching).


What the WTS is teaching is NOT supported in what is written. There is no teaching or example of a Christian who is not a brother of Christ (hence, being among the brothers in the sheep and the goats parable, rather than the sheep). There is no teaching or example of a Christian who is not anointed with holy spirit. There is no teaching or example of a Christian who is not permitted to partake of the body and blood of Christ (because of a different 'calling').

No one taught these things - not Christ, not the apostles, not what is written.


**


The WTS is telling her members that they are not (and most of them cannot be) part of the new covenant.

The WTS is telling her members that they are not permitted to eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ (something Christ said one must do in order to remain in Him, and Him in them).


The WTS is the one telling her members that they are not the brothers of Christ (that their hope lies instead in how they assist the leadership in the WTS).


Yet you are taking issue with me simply because I said that a Christian is an anointed one (as every example we have in what is written has also attested)?


I have not even said that you cannot be or will not be a sheep, dear jw. It simply has nothing to do with what the WTS has taught.





May anyone who wishes to know the truth of this (or any) matter, be given ears to hear so as to hear the truth from the TRUTH (Christ Jaheshua). May anyone who thirsts and anyone who wishes, as the Spirit and the Bride say to you, "Come! Take the free gift of the water of Life!"




Peace again to you, and to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 14180
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Contact:

Post by JehovahsWitness »

[Replying to post 1448 by tam]

Any reference to the Watchtower is irrelevant, I write what my LORD has instructed me to: do you have anything to say about my Lord telling me to write? If you are afraid to address my posts directly so be it. Scripture not your opinion on a magazine is what I'm interested in discussing. WT, WT, WT WT is all you can repeat ad nauseum... you insist on sharing your opinion on something you've read instead of responding to my posts, a very weak evasion tactic. If you can't respond to what MY LORD has told me to post, why not just say so, rather than give your opinion on something you read in the Watchtower (as if I sm the leadt bit interested in that).

In case you have forgotten our earlier exchange on this point, I will repost what you said. I'm sure you know that Christians usually stick to their word.
JehovahsWitness wrote:
tam wrote:
If you want to discuss the actual text and its meaning we can do that
Yes that is exactly what I want. I (perhaps mistakenly) thought that is what you wanted too. For Christians the bible is our source text and we view it as essential finding truth and maintaining our faith. I hope you can see then why we focus on it.

Repeating a human dogma doesnt make it true especially for Christians. You keep posting as if the fault lies with me, what I shared, as I have learned from JESUS CHRIST My Lord, my Saviour and Master, and the one that sits in the unapproachable light if immorality ), supported in what is written (both in example and in teaching). You however step beyond scripture, claiming something cannot be when he said nothing of the kind. By doing this you set youself above my Lord, (as if he would have said "an unanoited christian is an oxymoron" but was to forgetful, so you will say it for him.) Anyway, you are not obliged to accept what MY LORD JEHOSHUA , THE CHRIST Zguides me to post, I am only obliged to speak.

PLEASE NOTE My dear, DEAR Tam I have not said you cannot possibly be an anointed Christian ( that's not for me to judge) the problem is in you false dogma and pharisitical reasoning.



JW

RELATED POSTS
Does the word CHRISTIAN mean a spirit anointed disciple of Christ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 22#1005222

Is it true that Christan wwith an earthly hope cannot possibly be identifed with the SHEEP of Math 25?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 60#1005160

INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 6298
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT

Post by onewithhim »

[Replying to post 1449 by JehovahsWitness]

And, JW, I don't think you are always bringing up the WTS. It was tam who brought it up, and she is the one who keeps denigrating the brothers in the Governing Body, without the WTS having been brought up by you (which I don't believe you have done).



.

tam
Prodigy
Posts: 4188
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Contact:

Post by tam »

[Replying to post 1449 by JehovahsWitness]

Peace to you (and to the dear reader),

JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 1448 by tam]

Any reference to the Watchtower is irrelevant,


It became relevant when you said (to me, in response to what I had shared):
Jehovahs Witnesses ignore those that like the Pharisees go beyond scripture.
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 32#1005032


It is indeed relevant to post what the WTS teaches to a) see if this statement is true of what jws believe, and b) reveal the double standard that you were applying.
I write what my LORD has instructed me to: do you have anything to say about my Lord telling me to write?If you are afraid to address my posts directly so be it.
I am not afraid to address your posts. I have been doing so for quite some time now.

But I am going to clarify something:

When I gave credit to my Lord for what I shared, it was not meant to to give an air of authority to myself. Nor was I lying about it as some kind of 'gotcha' moment. No, I am simply giving credit where credit is due (to my Lord), instead of taking credit for myself. If I claimed it as my own wisdom, then I would be both a thief and a liar. I am not willing to steal from God or His Son or lie and pretend that the wisdom is mine, when it is not.



Scripture not your opinion on a magazine is what I'm interested in discussing.


I showed you scripture (many in fact on various topics in this thread).


WT, WT, WT WT is all you can repeat ad nauseum...


WT is a magazine.
I have brought up teachings of the WT SOCIETY (WTS) – sometimes that will include a quote from a WT - and I explained my reasons for doing so above.
you insist on sharing your opinion on something you've read instead of responding to my posts, a very weak evasion tactic.

I have responded to your posts numerous times without sharing what the WTS teaches OR even my opinion on what the WTS teaches:

https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 26#1005026
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 91#1005091
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 30#1005030
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 64#1005164
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 78#1005178
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 27#1005227
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 32#1005232
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 69#1005369
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 75#1005375
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 23#1005423
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 28#1005628


Those are just some posts that do not mention even the word “WTS� (unless I pasted something wrong accidentally).
In case you have forgotten our earlier exchange on this point, I will repost what you said. I'm sure you know that Christians usually stick to their word.
JehovahsWitness wrote:
tam wrote:
If you want to discuss the actual text and its meaning we can do that
Yes that is exactly what I want. I (perhaps mistakenly) thought that is what you wanted too. For Christians the bible is our source text and we view it as essential finding truth and maintaining our faith. I hope you can see then why we focus on it.
In between my post and yours (referenced in your quote above), your response to a subsequent post of mine was to simply write... "Irrelevant". When I said that kind of response was entirely unproductive and pointless and that it was time I moved on... you responded with the following false and misleading statement:
If you think an exchange discussjng scripture alone is "entirely unproductive and pointless" those are your feelings and I take no ownership of them. - jw

I of course said no such thing. Your statement was misleading and manipulative and your posts continue in the same manner (including the posts where you ‘copy’ my words as if they are your own). This – and the fact that most everything has been responded to in previous posts – is why I have stopped responding to your posts (except where OWH said the answer was in your post, so as to be able to respond to her questions, and then to summarize).




Peace again to you,
- a slave of Christ,
tammy

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 14180
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Contact:

Post by JehovahsWitness »

[Replying to post 1451 by tam]

All your non-Watchtower obsessed posts have been thoroughly debunked as anyone that reads the numerous responses will see. If you have no counter arguments, nothing is achieved by reposting the same thing over and over.
tam wrote:
I have brought up teachings of the WT SOCIETY (WTS) – sometimes that will include a quote from a WT - and I explained my reasons for doing so above.

I dont care what your reasons for bringing up the Watchtower are, your reasons are irrelevant, . From what I can see nobody has asked you for your opinion on any magazines at all, much less the Watchtower Society. I haven't mentioned it and from what I can see it there is no mention of it in the OP. You are free of course to start another thread and share what you think of Watchtower articles, possibly in a world of 7,5 billion people there might be one person that cares.

If you are really interested in the beliefs of Jehovahs Witnesses, I will take the liberty of pointing out there is are entire subforums devoted to finding out about the beliefs of others ...
Questions for a GROUP
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... m.php?f=45

And another

Questions for a specific User
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... m.php?f=26

... and another

Questions about a specific BELIEF
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... m.php?f=44

Myself and the other Witnesses here have responded to a wide variety of enquiries there about Jehovahs Witnesses, their beliefs, organjsation and literature. I'm sure if you post respectfully in such a forum your questions will be given due attention. I suspect our Webmaster has set these up so threads dont get loaded down precisely with the irrelevancies you seem so enamoured of.

Now .... would you like to return to scripture or does your form of Christianity prohibit that?




JEHOVAHS WITNESS
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 14180
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Contact:

Post by JehovahsWitness »

[Replying to post 1451 by tam]



WHO ARE THE SHEEP IN JESUS ILLUSTRATION OF THE SHEEP AND THE GOATS?

Image

In Jesus' famous Olivet discourse he explained what he would do when he returned and outlined the events leading up to that. In one of his illustrations he spoke all "the nations" being before him being sseperated like sheep from goats. These individuals are divided into two groups : those judged worthy of ever lasting life (1) and those cursed to eternal desturction (2)

Do "the nations" refered to in the illustration refer exclusively to non-Christians? Not necessarily, the expression "the nations" is more often than not used in the Greek Scriptures to people that were not Jewish (Gentiles), yet Jesus indicated there would be people from " all the nations" that would become baptized Christians (Mat 28:19, 20). Indeed the first century congregation was made of both Jew and gentile Christians (see Acts 13:48). Evidently then the expression the nations here is usedgenerically to refer to individuals of every nationality on earth, ie everyone .

Does the nations not refer exclusively to non-believers? Not necesarily. The only group we can reasonably assume not included would be Christs "brothers" (anointed co- rulers) since the bible indicates they will share in the judging.

What are we to make of the fact that in the illustration, the sheep question Jesus as to when they assisted him? Does this not indicate they must be non-believers? No, Jesus gave his illustrations to teach a point, not to be taken literally. Just as the righteous will not literally be placed on Jesus' right hand side, so they will not have to literally ask Jesus when they helped him. The point was not to communicate that an identifying mark of the sheep is their ignorance of spiritual matters, but rather to highlight to this group how highly he values their support of his brothers; he did this illustratively by having the sheep ask a question, that being just a literary device, springboard to the main point:. In short it is not the question that carries the import, it's the answer.

Further note the following:
  • The sheep request ...

    - no explainations as to who Jesus is

    - they address him as their "Lord"

    - they do not request who the brothers are
Moreover...
  • - the bible says it is baptism that is the request for an approved standing

    - nowhere in the bible are works without faith in Jesus (ie humanitarian work) presented as the basis for salvation

    - there is to be a great crowd of people that "come out of" (survive) the tribulation and are depicted as recognising that Jesus and Jehovah as the means of their salvation. They are not depicted as bejng resolved to find out who Jesus is.

    - the wicked are to be removed from the earth and the righteous left, so these people as a group have been judged as righteous

There is clearly there is no basis to conclude the sheep must be non-believers. Indeed we can conclude that those sheep could be described as faithful supporters of Christs brothers and who is a better position to render such support but fellow Christians that entertain an earthly hope?



JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

tam
Prodigy
Posts: 4188
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Contact:

Post by tam »

Peace to you,

In Jesus' famous Olivet discourse he explained what he would do when he returned and outlined the events leading up to that. In one of his illustrations he spoke all "the nations" being before him and seperation sheep from goats.


People of the nations who are alive on the earth at the time Christ returns, yes... except for those who are His brothers (Christians who have been caught up to meet Him in the sky upon His return, and then changed, in a twinkling).

These individuals are divided into two groups : those judged worthy of ever lasting life (1) and those cursed to eternal desturction (2)
Yes.
Do "the nations" refered to in the illustration refer exclusively to non-Christians? Not necessarily, the expression "the nations" is more often than not used in the Greek Scriptures to people that were not Jewish (Gentiles), yet Jesus indicated there would be people from " all the nations" that would become baptized Christians (Mat 28:19, 20). Indeed the first century congregation was made of both Jew and gentile Christians (see Acts 13:48). Evidently then the expression the nations refers to individuals of every nationality on earth, ie everyone .
Do you agree that the brothers of Christ are not included in this expression?

(Yes those brothers come from every nation, tribe, people and language, but they are not included in the 'people of the nations' who are gathered before the King.)


Does the nations not refer exclusively to non-believers? Not necesarily.


Agreed in a sense... but only because a non-christian is not necessarily a non-believer. Most people believe in God (of some sort), many are not Christian. And of course one could be a disciple of Christ (and therefore a believer) without yet being Christian. (your personal disagreement on this last point is noted).


**

(That being said, you stated below that baptism is required to have an approved standing, while also stating earlier in the thread that baptism does not make a person a Christian. Does that mean you are saying that some are unapproved Christians? If I am understanding your requirements correctly, a person could then certainly be a believer without (yet) being 'approved'. In which case, there could be believers among the people of the nations who are just not 'approved'.)




The only group we can reasonably assume not included would be Christs "brothers" (anointed co- rulers) since the bible indicates they will share in the judging.

We can assume that His brothers are not included in the sheep and the goats.



Is there a teaching in what is written of Christians who are not brothers of Christ? Is there an example of a Christian in what is written who is not a brother of Christ? Or of a Christian who is not anointed, even?

If not, then there is a strong basis from the illustration itself that the sheep are non-Christian.
What are we to make of the fact that in the illustration, the sheep question Jesus as to when they assisted him? Does this not indicate they must be non-believers?
It indicates that they did not know that they had been doing those things for Him.
No, Jesus gave his illustrations to teach a point, not to be taken literally.


I suppose that would depend upon the illustration.

He does literally return. He does literally invite the sheep into the Kingdom. He does literally cast the goats into the outer darkness. So He does literally separate the sheep from the goats. He does literally declare the sheep righteous. He does literally mean that whatever they (the sheep and the goats) did (or did not do) for one of the least of His brothers, they did (or did not do) for Him.

Why assume that the sheep not knowing is not also literal?


Just as the righteous will not literally be placed on Jesus' right hand side, so they will not have to literally ask Jesus when they helped him. The point was not to communicate that an identifying mark of the sheep is their ignorance of spiritual matters, but rather to highlight to this group how highly he values their support of his brothers; he did this illustratively by having the sheep ask a question. In short it is not the question that carries the important point, it's the answer.

See above.
Further note the following:
  • The sheep request ...

    - no explainations as to who Jesus is
Neither do the goats request an explanation as to who the King is.

- they address him as their "Lord"
So do the goats address Him as their Lord.
- they do not request who the brothers are

Correct. But there are a great many of His brothers (both in the spirit and in the flesh) for them to have had opportunity to do good to even a least one of His brothers.

Similar to how a person might (unknowingly) show hospitality to an angel, by showing hospitality to a stranger (who is actually an angel). Hebrews 13:2


(And would not His brothers be with Him?)


Moreover...
  • - the bible says it is baptism that is the request for an approved standing
What specifically are you referring to, and are you suggesting that no un-baptized person (at the time Christ returns) could be one of the sheep mentioned in the sheep and the goats parable?
- nowhere in the bible are works without faith in Jesus (ie humanitarian work) presented as the basis for salvation
Paul speaks of this at Romans 2:13-16, where he mentions people of the nations doing BY NATURE the requirements of the law, that therefore they are a law unto themselves, their consciences being what convicts OR RELEASES them. He said such ones (who do the requirements of the law by NATURE) would be declared righteous.


On top of that, there is not a single mention of faith (or belief) of the sheep from the sheep and the goats parable. Christ does not invite them in on the basis of what they believed.


He invites them in on the basis of what they DID.
- there is to be a great crowd of people that "come out of" (survive) the tribulation and are depicted as recognising that Jesus and Jehovah as the means of their salvation. They are not depicted as bejng resolved to find out who Jesus is.
The great crowd is wearing white robes (washed clean in the blood of the lamb); they are carrying out sacred service in the Temple (this is what PRIESTS do), so yes, these ones ARE Christian.

Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection! The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him for a thousand years.



But that does not mean these ones are the sheep from the sheep and the goats parable.

- the wicked are to be removed from the earth and the righteous left, so these people as a group have been judged as righteous
Indeed, but see Romans 2:13-16, where some do BY NATURE the requirement of the law, and so are declared righteous. See also that the sheep (in the sheep and the goats parable) are not declared righteous for their beliefs, but rather for their deeds.



There is clearly there is no basis to conclude the sheep must be non-believers. Indeed we can conclude that those sneep could be described faithful Christian supporters of Christs brothers.
Except that there is basis (scriptural basis even) to conclude that the sheep are non-christians.


I do not see where you have presented any basis (scriptural basis) for a Christian who would not be included among the brothers of Christ; who is not invited into the new covenant; and who is not part of the Bride.




Peace again to you.[/i]

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 14180
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Contact:

Post by JehovahsWitness »

[Replying to post 1454 by tam]

Your personal disagreement has been duly noted . I wrote what MY LORD directed me to. We will have to agree to disagree.


Peace to you,

JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 6298
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT

Post by onewithhim »

tam wrote: [Replying to post 1449 by JehovahsWitness]

Peace to you (and to the dear reader),

JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 1448 by tam]

Any reference to the Watchtower is irrelevant,


It became relevant when you said (to me, in response to what I had shared):
Jehovahs Witnesses ignore those that like the Pharisees go beyond scripture.
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 32#1005032


It is indeed relevant to post what the WTS teaches to a) see if this statement is true of what jws believe, and b) reveal the double standard that you were applying.
No it is not necessary or relevant to bring the WTS into the debates. It has been said many times that we want to discuss the Scriptures, not what so-and-so says about the Scriptures. JehovahsWitness has clearly stated this. Therefore, please don't keep bringing up the WTS (for your purpose of bashing them). Let us discuss particular Scriptures.

Thank you.


.

tam
Prodigy
Posts: 4188
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Contact:

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
[Replying to post 1456 by onewithhim]

Let us discuss particular Scriptures.

See post 1454.

https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/ ... 51#1005951

Considering the "response" that post received, it does not appear as though some wish to discuss scripture after all, despite claims to the contrary.

If you want to discuss scripture, then perhaps you could respond to that post and the questions raised therein.





Peace again to you,
- a slave of Christ,
tammy

Post Reply