Do you believe in evolution or what your holy book says?

[Bumperstump Cummerbund]

Just questioning Cricket, are you saying that those who don't believe in the Trinity doctrine are blasphemous? As a JW I don't believe in the Trinity, and I can also quote scriptures supporting my belief, but I would never call anyone who does believe it blasphemous

Of course, if I've misinterpreted your post just let me know

[Cricket]

What I'm trying to say, is that if someone worships anything or anyone other than God, the Bible calls that blasphemy, or idolatry. We may only worship God (first and second commandments, and many other texts). So if we're going to worship Jesus (and the Bible says we should!), he must be God, IMO. Not trying to offend anyone here, just saying what the Bible says.

[Arcadia]

This discussion is so interesting and shows that even interpretations of the bible can vary greatly. I think it is better to see all information as subjective and debatable rather than absolute truth, just as this thread demonstrates both science and the bible are debatable. This thread proves there is no absolute truth, but the only information that is 'most true' or suited to each individual and culture.

[Nelle]

Arcadia, if there's no absolute truth, then my whole way of living is pointless, and every moment I've spent believing in God is a waste of time. I don't think I can make something true or untrue just by having an opinion on it. Anything's debatable, but I think the point of the debate is to get to the truth.

I know not everyone believes in absolute truth, but for me, if there's no absolute truth then my faith in an absolutely true God doesn't make much sense.

We all disagree, but I think many of us have come to terms with the fact that someone is wrong. And we have respectful discussion within that understanding. I mean - it's fine to say that something is 'most true' for people, but at the end of the day, when it comes to me and a Jewish or Muslim or Athiest friend - only one of us will be right - because of what our faiths are based on. Either there is a God or there's not. Either Jesus is God or he's not. He can't be God for me and not exist for someone else. It sounds like an aggressive point of view, but it's just matter of fact to me. If someone else is right, then I'm wrong. And if I'm right, then someone else is wrong. I've heard about many paths to the same God, but given that many faiths don't subscribe to that theory - even if many paths is right, that would make the faith wrong.

I love that we can have kind and respectful discussion in here. I love our community for that. I think we're all searching for the truth, but I don't think we're all right. xo

[sneakysparkle]

:yeahthat:
I agree absolutely Nelle - SO well put

[Cricket]

:yeahthat: Great post, Nelle. Thanks so much for putting that out there.

[butterfly_warrior]

Have to agree with Nelle and everyone else. There IS an absolute truth, we may not necessarily know all of it, but it is there.

I like that we can discuss and compare our truths respectfully. It's not often that it is possible to do so.

BW

[Roryrory]

We all disagree, but I think many of us have come to terms with the fact that someone is wrong. And we have respectful discussion within that understanding. I mean - it's fine to say that something is 'most true' for people, but at the end of the day, when it comes to me and a Jewish or Muslim or Athiest friend - only one of us will be right - because of what our faiths are based on. Either there is a God or there's not. Either Jesus is God or he's not. He can't be God for me and not exist for someone else. It sounds like an aggressive point of view, but it's just matter of fact to me. If someone else is right, then I'm wrong. And if I'm right, then someone else is wrong. I've heard about many paths to the same God, but given that many faiths don't subscribe to that theory - even if many paths is right, that would make the faith wrong

This reminds me of a particular Rowan Atkinson skit where he is welcoming people to Hell, but I will keep the details of that one to myself . But along these lines, because there can only logically be the conclusion that someone must be wrong, then surely any moral arguments which are based on religious teachings must be discounted? Surely only secular, logical "harm-based" analyses are the only ones capable of withstanding scrutiny? For example, if you say abortion is wrong because God says so, but it later transpires that there is no God, then the previous argument is invalid. In which case you would have to rely on an analysis of abortion which does not rely on religion. I know this is a bit OT, but this whole thread seems to be.....

(I must disclose my athesim in all fairness but I don't think this detracts form my point. I support people having their own religious beliefs but reject strongly any suggestion that a person's religious stance gives them the right to dictate issues of morality and how that impinges on my own decisions.)

[Peg]

[qs=Cricket]What I'm trying to say, is that if someone worships anything or anyone other than God, the Bible calls that blasphemy, or idolatry. [/qs]

Hi Cricket, I just wanted to say that you've made a very important point about Christian worship. Its for this very reason that we take the trinity doctrine very seriously because what the trinity doctrine does is introduce 3 'individuals' all worthy of worship....yet, as you've stated, only God is to be worshiped.

A lot of people think the same way as you do which is why they studied the trinity doctrine, turned it inside out and upside down in order to determine if worshiping a trinity is contrary to what we know God requires....that is to worship him alone. The early christian church became divided over this very issue because when the trinity was introduced, it was not based on any of the NT writings....it was based on pagan religions. And the fact is that worshiping a trinity IS in direct contradiction to what God requires which is why many reject it. However, this does not mean that we do not view Jesus as our Lord and King. We certainly do. The thing is that he is only our Lord and King because Jehovah has placed him in that position in order to redeem us from sin and death. Knowing that means we continue to worship God alone and thus avoid breaking the command to worship God alone.

The end result of Jesus kingship is explained for us by the Apostle Paul and he clearly shows that there will come a time when Jesus will relinquish his position as our Lord in order for mankind to be reunited with God the Father.

1Cor 15:24 "Next, the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power. 25*For he must rule as king until [God] has put all enemies under his feet. 26*As the last enemy, death is to be brought to nothing. 27*For [God] “subjected all things under his feet.” But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that it is with the exception of the one who subjected all things to him. 28*But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone"

Jesus whole purpose is to reunite mankind with God the Father. If we are not worshiping God the Father, then we are missing the whole point of what Jesus is trying to accomplish.

[Nelle]

I wonder if it's worth a thread figuring out the differences between Jehovah's Witnesses and (I dunno what to call it) - mainstream Christianity? I'd love to learn more, but I think it is a conversation that deviates off the path of TD's questions. Is anyone interested?

[widdly]

I would be very interested in a thread about the differences between JW's and other Christianity

[Peg]

i'd be happy to contribute to a thread about jw's beliefs and how they differ from the mainstream.

[Bumperstump Cummerbund]

There was a thread about this not too long ago - let me look it up when I get home and I'll post the link, rather than starting a new one

And Peg, I gotta spread the love apparently, but thanks for explaining that so well, I certainly wouldn't have made as much sense!

[Peg]

And Peg, I gotta spread the love apparently, but thanks for explaining that so well, I certainly wouldn't have made as much sense!

thanks, i just hope it was clear to everyone else lol