ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

David8318's Blog Replies
Post a New Blog

Vote on David8318 as a helpful ChristiaNet blogger by clicking this link. Currently David8318 has 175 votes. The higher the number of votes the more helpful this blogger is considered by the ChristiaNet community.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
//It was Steveng who first brought this up//- strongaxe.

Yes, but it is only you who choke on what Jehovah's Witnesses believe. Your first 2 posts on this blog show you gagging on what JW's believe. So what if they are different to you... wow it would be a dull world if it were only filled with strongaxes'.

I only posted on this blog to challenge your view of JW's. In your own mind you are fixated about JW's view of the cross. Why do you care whether JW's use the cross or not? Does the fact JW's do not use the cross threaten your belief? Its no big deal to JW's what Jesus died on. JW's do not use the cross because they follow the Bible at 1Cor.10:14, and because the cross pre-dates Jesus and has only been used by false religion.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
//make such a deal out of it//- strongaxe.

It was you who first posted on this subject 10/19/17 castigating JW's for suggesting JW's produce pictures of Jesus on an upright stake... "They keep insisting Jesus did not die on a cross" was your contention.

Why do you make such a big deal out of it? Why does it matter to YOU so much what JW's believe? I wouldn't have posted here if it hadn't been for you stomping all over JW belief's as if you're the 'be all and end all' on these matters. If you and yours want to worship a cross- go ahead. I don't care, and it makes no difference to me what Jesus died on.

You have a blind arrogance which leads you to a conceited view of other peoples belief's and opinions.

Anti-Christ Or The False Prophet
//they insert "other"//- strongaxe.

If you want to see a classic example of Bible tampering- look at the trinitarian insertion at 1 John 5:7,8. This will really stick in strongaxe throat.

Trinitarians insert: "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth."

This Trinitarian insertion does not appear in early Greek Manuscripts. In fact, Erasmus excluded those words from his first two editions of the New Testament because none of the Greek manuscripts he consulted contained them. He was later pressured by the church to include them in his third edition.

I detect the stench of hypocrisy waffting from strongaxe.

Anti-Christ Or The False Prophet
//The context does not allow for the word "other"//- loony1.

I disagree, and so does the NIV, NLT, ESV, NASB, NAS who use "other" in 1Corinthians 6:18. Context at 1 Cor.6:18 does agree with the use of "other" because the contrast is being made with sexual immorality, which is a sin against the body. "Every other sin [in contrast to the sin of immorality] is a sin outside the body". The use of "other" at 1 Cor.6:18 is legitimate even though "other" does not appear in the Greek.

The same inflected form of the Greek word used at 1Cor.6:18 is found at Col.1:16 ['panta'].

JW's use of "other" at Col.1:16 & 1Cor.6:18 is legitimate.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
//Why does a traditional cross THREATEN their beliefs//- strongaxe.

More to the point, strongaxe is threatened or perhaps frightened that his beloved cross is in fact false, and from pagan sources.

It would be expensive for strongaxe to remove the cross from his private collection, or to pull down crosses from his churches or remove the idols from inside. The realisation that the implement used to kill Christ could be something other than a cross is too uncomfortable for strongaxe to consider.

JW's on the other hand are not bound by false dogma as is strongaxe who must perpetuate the false religious idol that is the cross. Strongaxe is gagging on JW belief's because he knows JW's teach the truth.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
//It doesn't matter to ME//- strongaxe.

Oh yes it does! You cannot conceive of any other possibility other than that with which you have been conditioned to believe- that Jesus died on a cross. You are a small pawn in a much bigger pagan picture strongaxe. You tow the pagan party line and you're good at it.

I agree with you on John 20:25. As I've said, 2 nails could have been used to pin Jesus' hands above his head. They obviously used one nail for his feet which were likely overlapping eachother. So it is also possible they did the same with his hands above his head, and used one nail for his overlapping hands.

But you cannot reason this way because you are not allowed to "think outside the pagan box".

Anti-Christ Or The False Prophet
//choking on this particular gnat//

I can hear strongaxe gagging.

Strongaxe asks "I wonder why" NIV doesn't use "other" at Colossians 1:16. The reason being, as always with Trinitarians- is bias. Trinitarians are bias toward a false trinitarian god.

Translating Colossians 1:16 in the same way they do at 1 Cor.6:18 would be speaking against the trinity. If NIV used "other" at Col.1:16 as they do at 1Cor.6:18 it would go against their trinity dogma. NIV ( and most other trinitarian translations) are inconsistent in this regard.

Proof again that trinitarians are not influenced by context or grammar or even interested in truth. They are driven by dogma.

Anti-Christ Or The False Prophet
//they insert "other" even though nothing in the context nor Greek grammar suggests it//- strongaxe.

Rubbish! Both context and grammar agree with "all other" at Col.1:16.

The Greek word used is "panta", an inflected form of the Greek word "pas". At 1 Cor.6:18 we find, "All other sins a person commits are outside the body" [NIV]. The word "other" is used here legitimately just as it is in Col.1:16.

Using "all other" agrees with context. Col.1:16 says, "...all things have been created through him and for him" [NIV]. Christ is not the creator. Rather, God is creating through Christ, and for him.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
//"where the nails were" refers to the nail marks in the hands//- strongaxe.

Really? Are you sure? You forget they also nailed his feet. But I agree, 2 nails could have been used to impale his hands above his head on the stouros ['torture stake']. But they could have used one nail by overlapping the hands and hammering that one nail through both hands. Whether they used 2 nails, or one nail to impale his hands, Thomas is correct in asking to see "the nail marks in his hands".

I've said it before- the implement used is irrelevant. But to strongaxe it does matter because he must worship the false religious cross. Believing there were less than 3 nails eliminates his cross- which could be expensive for him.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
//neither Strong nor Vines have had the last work about Greek Lexicography// -Cluny.

Neither has your Un-orthodox crowd.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
//NIV - Where the NAILS were//

To me [and others] Thomas wanted to see the nail marks in Jesus' hands and feet- "the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were" [NIV].

//OWN tracts show one nail used//

No they show at least 2 nails- 1 for the hands and 1 for the feet. It could have been one nail through both hands- Thomas asked to see, "the nail marks in his hands". One nail through both overlapping hands above his head would have made "nail marks".

The number of nails used is only relevant to ones like strongaxe who perpetuate the false religious symbol of the cross, and must dogmatically believe it could not have been less than 3 nails.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
//STAVROS means Cross//- Cluny.

According to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, [stouros G4716]:

"From the base of histemi, a stake or post (as set upright)..."

Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words:

"Noun, G4716, stauros: denotes, primarily, an upright pale or stake."

A Greek-English Lexicon, by Liddell and Scott, defines xylon: "piece of wood, log, beam, post... stake on which criminals were impaled" (Oxford, 1968, pp. 1191).

JW's have every right to translate stouros as 'torture stake'. Cluny's Un-orthodox group holds to "cross" purely because it perpetuates a false religious symbol.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
//John 20:25 "except I shall see in his hands the print of the NAILS..."//

Obviously more than 1 nail was used to impale Jesus on whatever was used to kill him. But the scriptures do not state how specifically Jesus' hands were impaled. His hands could have overlapped eachother above his head and one nail driven through both at the same time. Or both hands could have had a nail each to impale him on the torture stake. These details are irrelevant.

Thomas' full quote at John 20:25 says: "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe." [NIV]

Jesus' hands & feet were nailed. Of course more than one nail was used.

Cross Or An Upright Stake
No, it doesn't matter how Jesus died. The point is Jesus died. Jesus' death is pivotal for our salvation. Something Cluny's apostate Un-orthodox church refutes because it believes Jesus is "God" who cannot die.

The cross as a symbol of worship pre-dates Jesus Christ. The pagan Egyptians used the cross as a fertility symbol. The Babylonians used the cross or Tau ("T") as a religious symbol for their false god "Tammuz". The cross is the religious symbol of false religion- not the implement used to kill Jesus.

Using the cross, Cluny's Un-orthodox crowd perpetuate the false religious symbol used by pagans long before Jesus came and died for us.

The implement used to kill Jesus is irrelevant.

Conflicting Christians Opinions
//Heb 1:5 isn't a "Direct Quotation."//- john9346.

Well we must remember when Paul was quoting from the Hebrew scriptures, it wasn't "Samuel chapter 7 verse 14". They didn't have chapter and verse in Pauls day. So to say he didn't quote the "whole verse" is an obscure line of reasoning. Paul is quoting what he saw in the scroll of Samuel... not a verse.

And of course the Hebrew speaking Christians in Pauls day would have been familiar with the prophetic reference from the scroll of Samuel. Jesus did compare himself to Solomon- Lu.11:31.

"and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he will be my son"- 2Sam.7:13,14, Heb.1:5b. (NIV).

Conflicting Christians Opinions
MarkEaton! I'm speechless! Thank you for your concern. Is this really you? That's what I call a Christian post. I congratulate you for your honesty and humility.

Please also accept my humble apologies if I have in the past ever given you a hard time. I do know we disagree quite passionately on many issues but ultimately we do believe in the God of the Bible and that Christ is our saviour.

Faith and belief in the scriptures is both an intellectual and emotional process. Our emotions can run away with us on occasion and we are all imperfect. So we do say things we may later regret. And even I sometimes forget that there is another human being the other end of the 'blogosphere'.

I give you my kind regards.

Conflicting Christians Opinions
//Ps.102:25, Heb 1:10//- john9346.

Again john9346 stretches and twists scripture to fit his pagan trinity dogma.

First, Hebrews 1 speaks of Father and Son.

Is the Father also the Son? No, because the Son is the one through whom God performed creation as described by the psalmist. (Col.1:15, 16, Proverbs 8:22, 27-30.)

Also, note the quote at Hebrews 1:5b. This is a quote from 2 Samuel 7:14 and is applied to the Son of God. Although that text is applied first to Solomon, the later application of it to Jesus Christ does not mean that Solomon and Jesus are the same. Jesus is "greater than Solomon" and carries out a work foreshadowed by Solomon- Luke 11:31.

The Son is not God anymore than he is Solomon.

Conflicting Christians Opinions
"Listen to what Luke states", john9346.

Notice john9346 doesn't quote Acts 5:9. Because it clarifies what Luke is saying. The holy spirit is not "God", but is "OF" God. Small word but makes a huge difference.

Of course lying to the holy spirit is lying to God. The holy spirit is "of" God and is sent by God to carry out his will on earth. Anyone working against the works of the holy spirit is thus working against God. Anyone lying against the holy spirit is thus lying against God. But that doesn't mean the holy spirit is God.

The notion that the holy spirit is "God" was not official "church" doctrine until 381AD. Why? Because it is not a Bible teaching.

Conflicting Christians Opinions
Luke writing by the Holy Spirit disagrees with you... john9346.

Luke does not call the holy spirit "God" anywhere in his Gospel or in Acts. John9346 must stretch his belief and twist what Luke says to fit his pagan-Athanasian creed. John9346 omits Acts 5:9 which says Ananias tested "the spirit of Jehovah". The holy spirit is not 'Jehovah'... it is "of" or from Jehovah.

It wasn't until 381AD, some 300 years after Luke that john9346's pagan "church" erroneously decided to make the holy spirit "God". Not because scripture says so, but because pagan Trinitarians Constantine and Athanasius wanted it.

Conflicting Christians Opinions
//the culture and background of the Athanasian creed and why it was written??// john9346.

Athanasius was Pagan Roman Emperor Constantines sycophant.

In partnership with Pagan Emperor Constantine during the 4th Century, Athanasius and his cohorts dreamed up the unbiblical "Athanasian creed", a complete departure from truth and a headlong descent into pagan apostasy declaring 'Jesus is God'.

That was the 1st Council of Nicea in 325AD. It took these apostates years to decide who should be the 3rd person of the trinity. Not until 381AD did they decide who in their view should be the 3rd head of the trinity god.

The holy spirit wasn't "God" before 381AD. And Jesus wasn't "God" before 325AD!

Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.