Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by sinthia
As for the UN banning religion, I am more inclined to go with a one world enforced religion rather than a ban on religion. I suppose i'm not allowed
to think that though as it goes against JWs beliefs!!!
Actually that is not entirely true, one avenue of thought is that is exactly what will happen. The UN will ban organized religion and then roll out a
plan to control spirituality allowing individual beliefs.
I know where you are coming from, but my comment was my opinion, which to me at the moment, is entirely true! Is the remainder of your post a quote
from Ron Paul?
Originally posted by holywar
Originally posted by sinthia
as far as I can tell this isn't a discussion on Revelation, but a thread for us to comment on the statement that 'JWs believe UN will ban
religion.'
well, the thread title indeed makes this thread a discussion on the Book of Revelation because it's from this book that we draw this belief.
If I was to discuss Revelation, I would only use a recognised translation of the Bible. As your signature shows, you seem to use the 'NEW
WORLD TRANSLATION'.
I thought I said "read Revelation chapter 16 through 18"
NOT "read Revelation chapter 16 through 18 of the New World Translation"
Your argument about the NWT's "twists of scripture" is based on the ASSUMPTION that the KJV is a perfect translation. Well let me tell you a
little secret.... IT'S NOT. I can go into profound detail about this subject, but not on this thread. If you want to get into a Bible translation
debate, start a another thread about it.
No doubt I will be accused of JW bashing again
I accuse you of making incorrect assumptions.
As for the UN banning religion, I am more inclined to go with a one world enforced religion rather than a ban on religion. I suppose i'm not
allowed to think that though as it goes against JWs beliefs!!!
Maybe I can learn something from you, why don't you expand on your comment. For example... what scriptures do you use to draw to your conclusion?.
Would you like to know why we believe the way we do?
Let's try to have a civil discussion, just because "Jehovah's Witnesses" is on the title of the thread, does not mean it should be a name calling,
bashing, slandering, put down thread. Am I being too sensitive????
[edit on 11-7-2009 by holywar]
The KJV is probably the most recognised and accepted source of scripture there has ever been (catholics excluded). Don't forget, that the JWs used it
until they 'translated' there own. As for a Bible translation debate, for me it comes down to the credualty of the Textus Receptus or the sinaitcus
codex. I go with the TR over the SC. This isn't the place for such a debate I agree.
It is important though. If we start with different source information such as the NWT or KJV (or any other for that matter) it would be no surprise if
we came to different conclusions.
I think you are being oversensitive yes. The thread concerns JWs, and so they are bound to come into conversation. I can see from your past posts and
your profile etc that you are a zealous JW, and no doubt that would please the Kingdom Hall. I don't think i've been offensive to JWs, SDAs or
Mormons and I apologise for any offense caused.
I think there will be an attempt to form a one world religion based on literal points in Revelation. It is hard to worship or bow down to nothing, for
a non existant Christ rather than an antiChrist or false prophet to enter the scene, to recieve a mark representing the 'beast' if there is no
beast, for false Christs to decieve many, for the leaders of the world to 'obey' an non existant religion, for signs and wonders to decieve the very
elect etc......
If I were to really stick my neck out, I would either go for a metraiya type of new false messiah, or Mary.
To me, religion will carry on with a false messiah who will be acceptable to Jews, false Christians, Muslims and all denominations, rather than for
4+billion religious people in the world to just abandon their religion. It is easier to control religion with false watered down doctrines that preach
a loving 'oneness', than to say No Religion at all.