Bridge of Reason

What is the greatest film of all time? If you said: ‘Indiana Jones and The Raiders of the Lost Ark’ – you are correct. I love this film it has everything in it. There is action, there is a hero, there is a baddy, there is romance, there is humour, there is the search for biblical treasure and then they throw in some villainous Nazis – what a film! But recently, I discovered something else in the film – an anachronism. A What? An anachronism is something belonging to a period other than that in which it is exists. An example of this would be that you are perhaps watching a film about Henry VIII and suddenly an aeroplane fly’s past or, in the case of Indiana Jones, which is set in 1936, a map is shown showing names of countries that were not named as such in the 1930s. Though anachronistic, you can still enjoy these films, because they are just films, but sometimes anachronisms can be far more damaging and cannot be ignored. A Book from God What if anachronisms are found in a r

The Watch Tower teaches: ‘The Bible often calls Jesus “the Son of God.” (John 1:49) The expression “Son of God” acknowledges that God is the Creator, or Source, of all life, including that of Jesus. (Psalm 36:9; Revelation 4:11) The Bible does not teach that God literally fathered a child in the same way that humans produce children. ‘ The Bible also calls the angels “sons of the true God.” (Job 1:6) And the Bible says that the first human, Adam, was a “son of God.” (Luke 3:38) However, because Jesus was God’s first creation and the only one created directly by him, the Bible describes Jesus as the foremost Son of God.’ Monogenes The implication clearly is there is nothing so special about Jesus, except his being the ‘foremost Son of God.’ Note they avoid John 3:16, which creates real problems for them since it contains the Greek monogenes to describe Jesus’ relationship with the Father. On Facebook Bavesh Roger weighed in: ‘Much of this depends on the understanding of monogenes. Dr.

  “He that hath the spirit of contention is not of me,” said the Lord, “but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another ( 3 Ne phi 11:29 ). I only ever recall once being told, by Mormon Missionaries, that I had the spirit of contention. I cannot remember exactly what our discussion entailed, but they were not happy with something I said, and so they threw the charge at me. But what do they mean when they say a person has a spirit of contention? A Christ-like attitude Mormons will often say that a person has the spirit of contention, when they feel that their beliefs are in some way being undermined or ridiculed. A Christian challenging them about what they believe can often find themselves labelled as contentious. They may suggest that you are not exhibiting a ‘Christ-like attitude’ in what you are saying or the way you are saying it. Jesus, who is the one allegedly speaking in 3 Nephi 11:29, make

  In our latest Watch Tower Wednesday on the Facebook page we saw the Watch Tower Society teaches , 'The New World Translation is based on up-to-date scholarly research and the most reliable ancient manuscripts. 'Unlike paraphrased translations, the New World Translation renders words literally as long as doing so does not result in awkward wording or hide the thought of the original writings. Translations that paraphrase the Bible’s original text may insert human opinions or omit important details.' This is a big issue with Jehovah's Witnesses, who confidently believe they are bringing the very best translation today to our homes. How would you respond to such claims? Is the NWT superior to other translations? On the Facebook page Bavesh Roger observed , ‘... the NWT actually paraphrases words to fit their teachings. For example, Dr. Bowman correctly points out the paraphrasing of the Greek word " pneuma " in the NWT which has been paraphrased as "

From Death to Life What we find in instantaneous spiritual rebirth is a reversal of the fall. God warned Adam that if he ate from the tree he would surely die:   But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Genesis 2:17) Notice that God said that Adam would die that very day. But Adam went on to live to be 930 years old. So, did God lie? Not at all. What died that day was Adam’s spiritual connection to God . Adam and Eve suddenly found themselves naked and ashamed. Their rebellion had led to them losing their spiritual covering – God Himself. So, what did they do? And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. (Genesis 3:7) How telling this is. The response of man to his spiritual nakedness and rebellion is to try and cover himself. Fallen man believes that he can sort himself out. He believ

  In last week’s Watch Tower Wednesday on the Facebook page we saw the International Bible Students of Charles Russell's day became, in 1931, Jehovah's Witnesses. This was under the leadership of Joseph Rutherford, although many groups of International Bible students stayed faithful to Russell, and have survived until today. Jehovah's Witnesses, on their website, address this question of God's name and justify the change, making several main points: Jehovah is the name God gives himself in Isaiah 42:8 and Exodus 3:15. Jesus calls us to 'sanctify' God's name In Matthew 6:9 Joel tells us our salvation is in God's name Joel 2:32 God's name reveals his character But is that name Jehovah? Did Joseph Rutherford create more questions than answers for subsequent generations of Jehovah's Witnesses in his determination to give his followers their distinct identity, as opposed to the simpler name of International Bible students? A Lively Discussion A