From Newsgroup: alt.bible

Who is fulfilling Mt 24:14 in these last days?

-- King James
Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all
the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

That is a very important question. Since whoever is doing that, is
showing everybody they are they true religion predicted by Jesus.

Some believe that God uses more than one religion to preach to people.
That may sound good but just is not true. Notice:

-- King James
Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

So who are that "one faith" religion fulfilling Mt 24:14? The END
won't even come until that prophecy is fulfilled. And most would agree
that we are in the last days, so who is it?

Let's see what the prophecy says is going on. It has a specific
subject, "God's Kingdom", which is preached to ALL the nations on
earth.
Wow, that's quite an assignment. Some organized group must be part of
every nation on earth. And not only that, they must inform them of the
coming of God's Kingdom. Whew! Who is organized enough to pull that
off?

The 2020 global religions around the world show:

Christianity = 28.8%
Islam = 25.6%
Unaffiliated = 24.2%
Hinduism = 14.9%
Buddhism = 4.1%
Other religions = 2.4% (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups#:~:text=Major%20religious%20groups%20*%20Christianity%20(28.8%25)%20*,*%20Buddhism%20(4.10%25)%20*%20Other%20religions%20(2.40%25)

So they show Christianity in more countries than any other religions.
So we can see that one of Christianity's religions is likely the true
"one faith" one.

Now, the prophecy says that true religion must be in every nation in
the world and be preaching about "God's Kingdom" there. A religion
may be in many countries, but not highlighting "God's Kingdom". So who
is?

You have probably had Watchtower magazines left at your door. They are
left at doors all over the world. Read the cover. It says: "ANNOUNCING JEHOVAH'S KINGDOM"

There are 195 recognized countries in the world. (from AI), (https://www.google.com/search?q=how+many+countries+in+the+world%3F&sa=Google+Search)

Jehovah's Witnesses preach in 240 lands. (that includes islands of the
seas) So I would say they are in every country of the world, even
dangerous ones against religions)

So in conclusion, JW's are fulfilling Mt 24:14 to the letter. They are
telling all nations about God's Kingdom soon taking over all of
earth's affairs.

"THE GOOD NEWS ACCORDING TO JESUS
Episode 1: The True Light of the World
In this episode, see the amazing events that led up to JesusA birth.
Watch This Video".
See jw.org (12/17/2025)
James: zebrabible@proton.me
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.bible

========================================
Wed, 17 Dec 2025 21:00:06 -0500
<jsj6kk11a2arnosed6gt7t6u3u3hbk8ckr@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

Who is fulfilling Mt 24:14 in these last days?

-- King James
Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all
the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Not "Jehovah's Witnesses". They promote a false gospel that denies Jesus
is God, proclaims atonement for sin through your own physical death, and
many other Bible-contradicting heresies which are all strategically
designed and tailored to reject the truth in favor of their lies. And
yes, a lie remains a lie whether you believe it to be true or not (2 Thessalonians 2:11).
--
Have you heard the good news Christ died for our sins (rCa), and God
raised Him from the dead?

That Christ died for our sins shows we're sinners who deserve the death penalty. That God raised Him from the dead shows Christ's death
satisfied God's righteous demands against our sin (Romans 3:25; 1 John
2:1-2). This means God can now remain just, while forgiving you of your
sins, and saving you from eternal damnation.

On the basis of Christ's death and resurrection for our sins, call on
the name of the Lord to save you: "For 'everyone who calls on the name
of the Lord will be saved'" (Romans 10:13, ESV).

https://christrose.news/salvation

To automatically receive daily Bible teaching updates with colorful
images and website formatting, subscribe to my feed in a client like Thunderbird:

https://www.christrose.news/feeds/posts/default
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.bible

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 20:20:33 -0600, Christ Rose
<usenet@christrose.news> wrote:

========================================
Wed, 17 Dec 2025 21:00:06 -0500
<jsj6kk11a2arnosed6gt7t6u3u3hbk8ckr@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

Who is fulfilling Mt 24:14 in these last days?

-- King James
Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all
the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Not "Jehovah's Witnesses". They promote a false gospel that denies Jesus
is God, proclaims atonement for sin through your own physical death, and >many other Bible-contradicting heresies which are all strategically
designed and tailored to reject the truth in favor of their lies. And
yes, a lie remains a lie whether you believe it to be true or not (2 >Thessalonians 2:11).

So who then is fulfilling Mt 24:14? In these last days, you must see
some religious organization preaching to all countries about the
Kingdom of God. It's a prophecy of our day. It has to happen. Who???

denies Jesus is God,

Ex 33:20: "for no man shall see Me, and live.''
Col 1:15: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the
firstborn of every creature:"
Rev 3:14: "the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the
creation of God";
1 John 4:12: "No man has ever seen God"
John 14:28: "for my Father is greater than I."
1 Cor 11:3: "the head of Christ is God."

proclaims atonement for sin through your own physical
death,

Romans 6:7: "For he who has died has been freed from sin"
John 14:6: "No one comes to the Father except through
Me."

a lie remains a lie whether you believe it to be true or not

"1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive."
(Merriam-Webster)

"to say or write something that is not true in order to deceive
someone:"
(Cambridge Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org c dictionary c lie)

"A lie is an assertion that is believed to be false, typically used
with the intention of deceiving or misleading someone."
(Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org c wiki c Lie)

"A lie is something that someone says or writes which they know is
untrue."
(Collins Dictionary
https://www.collinsdictionary.com c dictionary c lie)

"THE GOOD NEWS ACCORDING TO JESUS
Episode 1: The True Light of the World
In this episode, see the amazing events that led up to JesusA birth.
Watch This Video".
See jw.org (12/17/2025)
James: zebrabible@proton.me
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.bible

========================================
Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:17:27 -0500
<2g68kk5kc1k9pc6c4hok6c047qntu0i8k1@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 20:20:33 -0600, Christ Rose
<usenet@christrose.news> wrote:

========================================
Wed, 17 Dec 2025 21:00:06 -0500
<jsj6kk11a2arnosed6gt7t6u3u3hbk8ckr@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

Who is fulfilling Mt 24:14 in these last days?

-- King James
Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all
the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Not "Jehovah's Witnesses". They promote a false gospel that denies Jesus
is God, proclaims atonement for sin through your own physical death, and
many other Bible-contradicting heresies which are all strategically
designed and tailored to reject the truth in favor of their lies. And
yes, a lie remains a lie whether you believe it to be true or not (2
Thessalonians 2:11).

So who then is fulfilling Mt 24:14? In these last days, you must see
some religious organization preaching to all countries about the
Kingdom of God. It's a prophecy of our day. It has to happen. Who???

Every single church I've ever attended proclaims the gospel and supports missionaries who proclaim the gospel oversees. "Jehovah's witnesses" do
not, because they teach many serious and Bible contradicting heresies.

denies Jesus is God,

Ex 33:20: "for no man shall see Me, and live.''
Col 1:15: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the
firstborn of every creature:"
Rev 3:14: "the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the
creation of God";
1 John 4:12: "No man has ever seen God"
John 14:28: "for my Father is greater than I."
1 Cor 11:3: "the head of Christ is God."

You promote the same refuted lies over and over without addressing the
facts. These have been answered no less than 30 times already, as will
be demonstrated below:

See article
<6225d8fe-08ca-42bb-83ca-9ca3f0c6157b@christrose.news>

========================================
Fri, 23 May 2025 15:42:31 -0400
<8qj13klor55mk3canradag5phgh4reangi@4ax.com>
"Sincerely", "soley from the Bible" and
"Honestly is my middle name"
James <zebrabible@proton.me> wrote:
========================================

Only God is good. (Luke 18:19)

rCo The man correctly concluded Jesus was good.

rCo Jesus did not deny He was good.

rCo Jesus pointed out that only God is good.

rCo Conclusion: Jesus wanted the man to conclude He was God.

Jesus didn't know the day or hour. But only God did. (Mt 24:36)

rCo Jesus did not cling to His equality with God (Philippians
2:6-11).

rCo He temporarily emptied Himself of independent access to His

divine attributes to provide an atonement for our sins
(Philippians 2:6-11).

Cannot look at God and still live. (Ex 33:20)

Which proves Jesus was God.

rCo In the beginning He was both with God and was God (John 1).

rCo Jesus never saw God directly in His unglorified human body.

rCo Jesus ascended back to the right hand of God in a glorified body
(Philippians 3:21) that can withstand the sight of God's glory
(Acts 2:33).

No man has ever seen God; (1 John 4:12)

rCo idem. See above.

rCo Are you denying his humanity now too?

rCo Jesus saw God as God, not as an unglorified human being.

rCo Jesus is the exception: rCLnot that anyone has seen the Father except
he who is from God; he has seen the Father.rCY (John 6:46, ESV)

Jesus has the same God as we do. (Mt 27:46)

Which is what we proclaim. In the beginning, Jesus was both "with God",
and "was God" (John 1:1ff.).

No one has seen the Father. (John 6:46)

Selective editing. See "except" in the verse below.

rCLNot that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God;
He has seen the Father.rCY (John 6:46, NKJV)

Jesus said he was the start of God's creations. (Rev 3:14)

And He was. Arch-o includes the meaning "cause" and "authority".

rCLIn the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things
were made through him, and without him was not any thing made
that was made.rCY (John 1:1rCo3, ESV)

You're trying to interpret "start" (arche) as "first created thing". It actually means "starter" of creation. So yes, Jesus was the cause of
God's creation (Colossians 1:16). He originated it (John 1:3). He
brought it into being (Hebrews 1:2).

Yes, Jesus was created by God (Col 1:15)

"firstborn" (pr+itotokos) includes the meaning "preeminent". It points to Jesus authority over creation, as one who has the "right of a firstborn"
Son. That this means Jesus is the Creator rather than created, is
evident in what you omitted from the context:

rCLHe is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all
creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on
earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or
rulers or authoritiesrCoall things were created through him and
for him.rCY (Colossians 1:15rCo16, ESV)

rCo This is why Watchtower has to keep eisegeting "other" into
Colossians 1, where it does not occur.

rCo This is not to make something "clear" which would have been obscure
without the addition of "other".

rCo It only makes sense if you are trying to enforce a denial of
Christ's deity despite what the passage plainly states.

God is not a three headed freak, but only ONE God. (Deut 6:4)

rCo The Bible teaches there is only one God Being (Deut. 6:4).

rCo The Bible teaches three persons are God: The Father (1

Corinthians 8:6), Son (John 1:1; John 20:28), and Holy Spirit
(Acts 5:3-4).

God is not a three headed freak, but only ONE God. (Mr 12:29)

Jesus is "a god" (Watchtower John 1:1 [New World Translation]).

rCLThomas answered him, rCLMy Lord and my God!rCY Jesus said to him,
rCLHave you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those
who have not seen and yet have believed.rCYrCY (John 20:28rCo29, ESV)

Only God is good. (Mr 10:18)

See above. You said the same thing with two different verse references.
Just include both references in one statement.

Jesus said must worship and serve ONLY God. (Mt 4:10)

rCo And since He accepted worship as God without rebuking the ones

who worshiped Him, He was claiming to be God (Matthew 14:33;
Matthew 28:9; John 9:38).

rCo The Jews understood this, which is why they tried to stone Him

(John 10:33).

In Heaven, God is STILL the HEAD of Jesus. (1 Cor 11:3)

rCo Husband and wife are both equal as children of God (Galatians

3:28).

rCo The wife voluntarily submits herself to the husband's authority

(Ephesians 5:22).

rCo Submitting to authority does not necessitate inequality of

being. It's a voluntary role that promotes unity between
equals (cf. Philippians 2:6ff.).

Jesus' angel said to "Worship God", not Jesus (Rev 19:10)

What kind of sophistry is this? He most certainly did not say "not Jesus".

rCLAnd the angel said to me, rCLWrite this: Blessed are those who are
invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.rCY And he said to me,
rCLThese are the true words of God.rCY Then I fell down at his feet
to worship him, but he said to me, rCLYou must not do that! I am a
fellow servant with you and your brothers who hold to the
testimony of Jesus. Worship God.rCY For the testimony of Jesus is
the spirit of prophecy.rCY (Revelation 19:9rCo10, ESV)

It was the angel who refused worship. He didn't tell anyone not to
worship Jesus.

Can you explain them?

I reject the false premise they have not already been explained at least
30 times or more.

rCo 9785cae6-9783-4518-ab62-75aeda149fa1@christrose.news
rCo 5bdc6c74-497d-45f3-85e6-ac3398b07aec@christrose.news
rCo 53ff0bef-d9da-417f-8715-8ad7a9334923@christrose.news
rCo 9785cae6-9783-4518-ab62-75aeda149fa1@christrose.news
rCo cnsn4j5hrr1qgn36fbbpaam5ah0fl8iihi@christrose.news
rCo verj4jh818nbur82994vrjo1p629g4ecf1@christrose.news
rCo 5i754jh7d4ioi4796lukir21m5oghhf58k@christrose.news
rCo nkag3jp0ua2u4t6648l38r8535kd41cp3o@christrose
rCo oqa23jp5dqu68t5ms59krsf9kkfte0liv1@christrose
rCo tea23jtm8qv66lfc9tvptdk0u1m0jgtmpb@christrose
rCo 4g923j1ekdre6g6gcq9gccdb1rb3eus4cv@christrose
rCo 2v8u2jpunpthgl1h5omcbf65vvbelcnh4i@christrose
rCo u50t2j9erbknalb6a1l8nn5ke1s99d204o@christrose
rCo vtvs2jt759ggo48eoo25043re97s2jn8hm@christrose
rCo ok1l2jtmq3tokb688hkb26fmarq0kqrojm@christrose
rCo v05e2j5fclhjd57q69s7v94tepm4ovo1sd@christrose
rCo aq4e2j5tr305i2k4p9ohjli7k9ej3ej0ad@christrose
rCo 8p8d2j51c58vat01akhjn6137i2pggr1f2@christrose
rCo t1q72jdvo0pcfp7qopek76o4ec3ure1hjj@christrose
rCo s2p72jpkm2mopjsavepgbfm9aqcniu3lj3@christrose
rCo 1ho72j1ld8qrshtiobe0tnrtes0ah6loon@christrose
rCo g6752jdli02k616sm15ha5v78fqs956idt@christrose
rCo ens42j5j46h5835d5ef12ithl8gnafbms8@christrose
rCo e8s42j5dno7lmqs3raosnlh2r95lra6sg2@christrose
rCo kfr42jd148tdef0iokggpkirq56t2dkqh1@christrose
rCo 81622jplck6ijg8mmj5copmoe087878r7f@christrose
rCo 0seb1jdrp26p18lg46h6t6i5nt44r699am@christrose
rCo nk680jt46qg9m6vg13pu21gd9u5mf1o8a3@4ax.com
rCo 1cc30j96revbhp94fhlnre86saf0tnie94@4ax.com
rCo nnkevipvol06rvicm02pmg1ep79o7q8rll@4ax.com
rCo u1CdnVGfapT8nOv4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com

proclaims atonement for sin through your own physical
death,

Romans 6:7: "For he who has died has been freed from sin"
John 14:6: "No one comes to the Father except through
Me."

The context shows your statement is a lie (noun):

rCLKnow ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism
into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory
of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we
have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be
also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man
is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from
sin.rCY (Romans 6:3rCo7, KJV 1900)


He's talking about believers who died with Christ to sin and rose with
him to newness of life through faith, NOT about those who died
physically. This is a self-evident lie that you promote, and which you
refuse to correct.

a lie remains a lie whether you believe it to be true or not

(Next, he will try to CONFUSE the verb "lie" with the noun "lie")

"1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive."
(Merriam-Webster)

Here's the part you omitted:

"verb (2)...lied; lying" (Mirriam-Webster.com)

intransitive verb

That's the verb form, not the noun form. For example, if someone
believes something to be true, they are not "lying" and have not "lied".
Their belief in what they are saying, however, does not change the fact
that when their statement is false, it is still a "lie" (noun).

Proof

rCLAnd for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that
they should believe a lie:rCY (2 Thessalonians 2:11, KJV 1900)


Observe:

1) They "believe" a lie.

2) It is still called a "lie", even though they believe it.


Now we get to see if you really mean what you say when you claim to
believe the Bible is the final authority and that man-made sources do
not invalidate what the Bible teaches:

"to say or write something that is not true in order to deceive
someone:"
(Cambridge Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org rC| dictionary rC| lie)

1. That's not the Bible. That's a human source. You don't get to
invalidate what others say if it comes from a source other
than the Bible, then turn around and pretend to invalidate
what the Bible teaches from a human source.

2. Again, you cherry pick the verb form. Here's the context: lie
verb (SPEAK FALSELY) B1 [ I ] present participle lying | past
tense lied | past participle lied to say or write something
that is not true in order to deceive someone: (Cambridge
Dictionary)


Observe

rCLAnd for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that
they should believe a lie:rCY (2 Thessalonians 2:11, KJV 1900)

1) They "believe" the lie.

2) It is still called a "lie", even though they believe it's the truth.

The Bible shows that the noun form of "lie" refers to whether or not the substance of the statement is true, not whether or not the person
believes it to be true.

"A lie is an assertion that is believed to be false, typically used
with the intention of deceiving or misleading someone."
(Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org rC| wiki rC| Lie)

Again, human sources that are not inspired Scripture, do not invalidate
what the Bible teaches. Further, Wikipedia is not even a dictionary.
Whoever wrote that article got it wrong. you should submit an edit for that:

A lie (noun) refers to falsehood as content. It is something that does
not correspond to reality, whether or not anyone recognizes it as false. Scripture uses this sense when it speaks of people rCLbelieving a lierCY (2 Thessalonians 2:11, ESV). The lie remains false even when it is
sincerely believed.

To lie (verb) refers to an act of deception. It requires knowledge or
intent. The speaker knows the statement is false and presents it as true
in order to mislead. This is the only sense Watchtower James admits
exists, as he seeks to confuse a lie (falsehood) with lying (knowingly
trying to deceive).,

The Wikipedia definition wrongly blends these categories by defining a
lie as rCLan assertion that is believed to be false.rCY That definition fits the verb (lying) but not the noun (a lie). A person can believe a lie precisely because he does not believe it to be false. That is the
biblical problem of deception.

A clearer and more accurate distinction would read like this:

A lie (noun) is a false statement or falsehood that contradicts reality, regardless of whether it is believed to be true or false.
To lie (verb) is to knowingly assert a falsehood as truth with the
intent to deceive.

"A lie is something that someone says or writes which they know is
untrue."

(Collins Dictionary
https://www.collinsdictionary.com rC| dictionary rC| lie)

Again, you are not citing an inspired source, or letting the Bible
define what the word means. Collins reflects common English usage rather
than inspired Bible revelation. It makes the same error as Wikipedia, confusing the intent with the substance. A false statement is a lie in
and of itself.

Collins defines a lie (noun) as something rCLwhich they know is untrue.rCY That definition imports the intent of the speaker into the nature of the statement itself. It effectively defines the noun by the verb. In doing
so, it excludes the very category Scripture explicitly names: believing
a lie.

Scripture uses rCLlierCY in an objective sense. A lie is falsehood in
contrast to truth, independent of the hearerrCOs awareness or the
speakerrCOs intent.

rCLThey exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served
the creature rather than the CreatorrCY (Romans 1:25, ESV).
The lie exists prior to belief and functions as an objective falsehood replacing truth.

rCLTherefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe
what is falserCY (2 Thessalonians 2:11, ESV).
People believe a lie precisely because they do not know it is false.

By contrast, Scripture treats lying as a moral action requiring
knowledge and intent.

rCLYou shall not bear false witness against your neighborrCY (Exodus 20:16, ESV).
This command addresses deliberate deception, not mere error.

rCLLying lips are an abomination to the LORDrCY (Proverbs 12:22, ESV).
The guilt lies in knowingly speaking falsehood.

So the biblical categories remain clear:

A lie (noun): falsehood that contradicts reality, whether believed or not.
To lie (verb): knowingly speaking falsehood as truth in order to deceive.

Modern dictionaries often blur this distinction because they describe
usage, not ontology. Scripture defines reality more carefully. People
can speak lies. People can believe lies. In both cases, the falsehood
exists independently of human perception.

Truth does not depend on belief. Falsehood does not require intent to
exist. Scripture keeps those lines clean, even when modern definitions
do not.

Works Cited

Cambridge Dictionary. "LIE | definition in the Cambridge English
Dictionary". Dictionary, https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/lie. Accessed 18 December. 2025.

Mirriam-Webster.com. "LIE Definition ". Merriam-webster, https://merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie. Accessed 18 December. 2025.
--
Have you heard the good news Christ died for our sins (rCa), and God
raised Him from the dead?

That Christ died for our sins shows we're sinners who deserve the death penalty. That God raised Him from the dead shows Christ's death
satisfied God's righteous demands against our sin (Romans 3:25; 1 John
2:1-2). This means God can now remain just, while forgiving you of your
sins, and saving you from eternal damnation.

On the basis of Christ's death and resurrection for our sins, call on
the name of the Lord to save you: "For 'everyone who calls on the name
of the Lord will be saved'" (Romans 10:13, ESV).

https://christrose.news/salvation

To automatically receive daily Bible teaching updates with colorful
images and website formatting, subscribe to my feed in a client like Thunderbird:

https://www.christrose.news/feeds/posts/default
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.bible

On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 18:53:11 -0600, Christ Rose
<usenet@christrose.news> wrote:

========================================
Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:17:27 -0500
<2g68kk5kc1k9pc6c4hok6c047qntu0i8k1@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 20:20:33 -0600, Christ Rose
<usenet@christrose.news> wrote:

========================================
Wed, 17 Dec 2025 21:00:06 -0500
<jsj6kk11a2arnosed6gt7t6u3u3hbk8ckr@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

Who is fulfilling Mt 24:14 in these last days?

-- King James
Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all >>>> the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Not "Jehovah's Witnesses". They promote a false gospel that denies Jesus >>> is God,

Yes, I have showed you how the Bible denies Jesus is God.

proclaims atonement for sin through your own physical death,

I have showed you how the inspired apostle Paul says that.

and

many other Bible-contradicting heresies which are all strategically
designed and tailored to reject the truth in favor of their lies.

What, are we in a James Bond spy ring or something? "Strategically
designed"? You've got to be kidding me.

And

yes, a lie remains a lie whether you believe it to be true or not (2
Thessalonians 2:11).

Mt 24:5 & 1 Tim 4:1 & 2 Tim 4:3,4. The demons are promoting lies, and
some are falling for it.

According to Webster and many others, a lie is only a lie if the
speaker knows it is false and tries to deceive. Rejoice, you are
learning something you did not know.

So who then is fulfilling Mt 24:14? In these last days, you must see
some religious organization preaching to all countries about the
Kingdom of God. It's a prophecy of our day. It has to happen. Who???

Every single church I've ever attended proclaims the gospel and supports >missionaries who proclaim the gospel oversees.

But the prophecy says they must highlight "God's Kingdom" to ALL the
countries of the world. I don't see that happening other than through
JW's.


"Jehovah's witnesses" do

not, because they teach many serious and Bible contradicting heresies.

If the churches can't handle it, they need to get out of the kitchen.

denies Jesus is God,

Ex 33:20: "for no man shall see Me, and live.''
Col 1:15: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the
firstborn of every creature:"
Rev 3:14: "the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the
creation of God";
1 John 4:12: "No man has ever seen God"
John 14:28: "for my Father is greater than I."
1 Cor 11:3: "the head of Christ is God."

You promote the same refuted lies over and over without addressing the >facts. These have been answered no less than 30 times already, as will
be demonstrated below:

See article
<6225d8fe-08ca-42bb-83ca-9ca3f0c6157b@christrose.news>

========================================
Fri, 23 May 2025 15:42:31 -0400
<8qj13klor55mk3canradag5phgh4reangi@4ax.com>
"Sincerely", "soley from the Bible" and
"Honestly is my middle name"
James <zebrabible@proton.me> wrote:
========================================

Only God is good. (Luke 18:19)

Since Jesus is a created being, compared to Almighty God, God would be
the 'goodest'.

o The man correctly concluded Jesus was good.

Of course Jesus is good. He is the best human to ever walk this earth.
But compared to the Creator of this universe, his goodness is
relative.

o Jesus did not deny He was good.

Yes he did. Read the verse again. It has the word ONLY in it.

o Jesus pointed out that only God is good.

Exactly.

o Conclusion: Jesus wanted the man to conclude He was God.

Your logic sometimes is way off the beat.

Jesus didn't know the day or hour. But only God did. (Mt 24:36)

o Jesus did not cling to His equality with God (Philippians
2:6-11).

If Jesus was God, he should know all the things God knows. Otherwise
God has mental problems. And needs to resurrect Sigmund Freud for
starters.

Thank God my God is perfect mentally. Is not a split personality, and
tortures NO ONE. I'll take Him any day over the churches' sadistic,
barbaric, mentally insane god.

o He temporarily emptied Himself of independent access to His

divine attributes to provide an atonement for our sins
(Philippians 2:6-11).

Ye, he gave up some of his powers he had before he became human. But
he asked for them all back again. And when that happens, in Heaven God
is still the head of Christ. (1 Cor 11:3

Cannot look at God and still live. (Ex 33:20)

Which proves Jesus was God.

And pigs can fly. Where do you dig this stuff up?

o In the beginning He was both with God and was God (John 1).

And you are your father's son, and are also your father.

o Jesus never saw God directly in His unglorified human body.

True. Apparently that would have killed him.

o Jesus ascended back to the right hand of God in a glorified body
(Philippians 3:21) that can withstand the sight of God's glory
(Acts 2:33).

Correct. But even with his full glory, he is always in subjection to
Almighty God.

No man has ever seen God; (1 John 4:12)

o idem. See above.

Yes, see above.

o Are you denying his humanity now too?

Where did that idea come from? He had to equal Adam, who lost
everlasting life for all humanity, but Jesus gained those prospects
back.

o Jesus saw God as God, not as an unglorified human being.

You are out on tangent. Come back to earth.

o Jesus is the exception: onot that anyone has seen the Father except
he who is from God; he has seen the Father.o (John 6:46, ESV)

Of course. When God started creating (Gen 1:1), Jesus was there.

Jesus has the same God as we do. (Mt 27:46)

Which is what we proclaim. In the beginning, Jesus was both "with God",
and "was God" (John 1:1ff.).

That's like saying, you were with your father and were your father.
Make sense? Not from the logic God gave us.

No one has seen the Father. (John 6:46)

Selective editing. See "except" in the verse below.

oNot that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God;
He has seen the Father.o (John 6:46, NKJV)

Of course.

Jesus said he was the start of God's creations. (Rev 3:14)

And He was. Arch? includes the meaning "cause" and "authority".

oIn the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things
were made through him, and without him was not any thing made
that was made.o (John 1:1u3, ESV)

You're trying to interpret "start" (arche) as "first created thing". It >actually means "starter" of creation. So yes, Jesus was the cause of
God's creation (Colossians 1:16). He originated it (John 1:3). He
brought it into being (Hebrews 1:2).

After Jesus was created, all the rest of the things were created
THROUGH Jesus.

Yes, Jesus was created by God (Col 1:15)

"firstborn" (pr?totokos) includes the meaning "preeminent". It points to >Jesus authority over creation, as one who has the "right of a firstborn" >Son. That this means Jesus is the Creator rather than created, is
evident in what you omitted from the context:

oHe is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all
creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on
earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or
rulers or authoritiesuall things were created through him and
for him.o (Colossians 1:15u16, ESV)

Yes, and without God, Jesus could not have created anything

-- King James
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

So who is behind all the creations?

o This is why Watchtower has to keep eisegeting "other" into
Colossians 1, where it does not occur.

And your favorite translation also includes words for clarity. They
all do it.

o This is not to make something "clear" which would have been obscure
without the addition of "other".

Since the Bible clearly says Jesus was created, he couldn't have
created himself.

o It only makes sense if you are trying to enforce a denial of
Christ's deity despite what the passage plainly states.

You keep repeating that falsehood. This may help you:

Jesus is a deity. (a god)
Jesus is a deity. (a god)
Jesus is a deity. (a god)
Jesus is a deity. (a god)
Jesus is a deity. (a god)
Jesus is a deity. (a god)
Jesus is a deity. (a god)

God is not a three headed freak, but only ONE God. (Deut 6:4)

o The Bible teaches there is only one God Being (Deut. 6:4).

o The Bible teaches three persons are God:

OK, let's look at all three and see where they say Jesus is God::


The Father (1

Corinthians 8:6)

-- New King James
1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is only one God, the Father, of
whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ,
through whom are all things, and through whom we live.

It says GOD is the Father. It doesn't say Jesus is.

, Son (John 1:1; John 20:28)

The Greek grammar is not followed at John 1:1. It really says Jesus
was "a god".

-- New King James
John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my
God!''

"Oh my God!","Holy smoke!", "Great Caesars Ghost!" It is an
exclamatory statement.



, and Holy Spirit

(Acts 5:3-4).

Is the Holy Spirit God according to Acts 5:3,4?

3. But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie
to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
4. Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold,
was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in
thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. (NKJV)

I see your connection here. And it sounds logical. But the Holy Ghost
is not a person. The Bible does not teach that the Holy Spirit it is a
real person, or any part of a triad God. The Bible words for "spirit"
come from "ruach" (Hebrew) and "pneuma" (Greek). One of the
definitions of "pneuma" is:

"a current of air, i.e. breath (blast) or a breeze". (Strong's
Concordance)

Thus it is 'a force in motion' like a breeze etc.

A thorough study of the Bible concerning the "Holy Spirit" shows that
the Holy Spirit is not a person, but the active force of God. For
example, a person can be "filled" with it, (Lu 1:41) "baptized" with
it, (Mt 3:11) and "anointed" with it. (Ac 10:38)

God is not a three headed freak, but only ONE God. (Mr 12:29)

Jesus is "a god" (Watchtower John 1:1 [New World Translation]).

oThomas answered him, oMy Lord and my God!o Jesus said to him,
oHave you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those
who have not seen and yet have believed.oo (John 20:28u29, ESV)

Only God is good. (Mr 10:18)

See above. You said the same thing with two different verse references.
Just include both references in one statement.

Jesus said must worship and serve ONLY God. (Mt 4:10)

o And since He accepted worship as God without rebuking the ones

who worshiped Him, He was claiming to be God (Matthew 14:33;
Matthew 28:9; John 9:38).

o The Jews understood this, which is why they tried to stone Him

(John 10:33).

In Heaven, God is STILL the HEAD of Jesus. (1 Cor 11:3)

o Husband and wife are both equal as children of God (Galatians

3:28).

o The wife voluntarily submits herself to the husband's authority

(Ephesians 5:22).

o Submitting to authority does not necessitate inequality of

being. It's a voluntary role that promotes unity between
equals (cf. Philippians 2:6ff.).

Jesus' angel said to "Worship God", not Jesus (Rev 19:10)

What kind of sophistry is this? He most certainly did not say "not Jesus".

Do you see not Jesus in quotation marks?

oAnd the angel said to me, oWrite this: Blessed are those who are
invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.o And he said to me,
oThese are the true words of God.o Then I fell down at his feet
to worship him, but he said to me, oYou must not do that! I am a
fellow servant with you and your brothers who hold to the
testimony of Jesus. Worship God.o For the testimony of Jesus is
the spirit of prophecy.o (Revelation 19:9u10, ESV)

Even though he was Jesus' angel, his angel said to "worship God", not
Jesus. If Jesus was God, he should have said to worship Jesus. BUT HE
DIDN'T.

It was the angel who refused worship. He didn't tell anyone not to
worship Jesus.

Can you explain them?

I reject the false premise they have not already been explained at least
30 times or more.

o 9785cae6-9783-4518-ab62-75aeda149fa1@christrose.news
o 5bdc6c74-497d-45f3-85e6-ac3398b07aec@christrose.news
o 53ff0bef-d9da-417f-8715-8ad7a9334923@christrose.news
o 9785cae6-9783-4518-ab62-75aeda149fa1@christrose.news
o cnsn4j5hrr1qgn36fbbpaam5ah0fl8iihi@christrose.news
o verj4jh818nbur82994vrjo1p629g4ecf1@christrose.news
o 5i754jh7d4ioi4796lukir21m5oghhf58k@christrose.news
o nkag3jp0ua2u4t6648l38r8535kd41cp3o@christrose
o oqa23jp5dqu68t5ms59krsf9kkfte0liv1@christrose
o tea23jtm8qv66lfc9tvptdk0u1m0jgtmpb@christrose
o 4g923j1ekdre6g6gcq9gccdb1rb3eus4cv@christrose
o 2v8u2jpunpthgl1h5omcbf65vvbelcnh4i@christrose
o u50t2j9erbknalb6a1l8nn5ke1s99d204o@christrose
o vtvs2jt759ggo48eoo25043re97s2jn8hm@christrose
o ok1l2jtmq3tokb688hkb26fmarq0kqrojm@christrose
o v05e2j5fclhjd57q69s7v94tepm4ovo1sd@christrose
o aq4e2j5tr305i2k4p9ohjli7k9ej3ej0ad@christrose
o 8p8d2j51c58vat01akhjn6137i2pggr1f2@christrose
o t1q72jdvo0pcfp7qopek76o4ec3ure1hjj@christrose
o s2p72jpkm2mopjsavepgbfm9aqcniu3lj3@christrose
o 1ho72j1ld8qrshtiobe0tnrtes0ah6loon@christrose
o g6752jdli02k616sm15ha5v78fqs956idt@christrose
o ens42j5j46h5835d5ef12ithl8gnafbms8@christrose
o e8s42j5dno7lmqs3raosnlh2r95lra6sg2@christrose
o kfr42jd148tdef0iokggpkirq56t2dkqh1@christrose
o 81622jplck6ijg8mmj5copmoe087878r7f@christrose
o 0seb1jdrp26p18lg46h6t6i5nt44r699am@christrose
o nk680jt46qg9m6vg13pu21gd9u5mf1o8a3@4ax.com
o 1cc30j96revbhp94fhlnre86saf0tnie94@4ax.com
o nnkevipvol06rvicm02pmg1ep79o7q8rll@4ax.com

???

o u1CdnVGfapT8nOv4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com

proclaims atonement for sin through your own physical
death,

Romans 6:7: "For he who has died has been freed from sin"
John 14:6: "No one comes to the Father except through
Me."

The context shows your statement is a lie (noun):

oKnow ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were >baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism
into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory
of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we >have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be
also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man
is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that >henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from
sin.o (Romans 6:3u7, KJV 1900)

He's talking about believers who died with Christ to sin and rose with
him to newness of life through faith, NOT about those who died
physically. This is a self-evident lie that you promote, and which you >refuse to correct.

You keep thinking I coined those words. Take your complaints to the
apostle Paul. He plainly said those who have died are freed from sin.
Now if you think you know more than the apostle Paul, you need to look
again.

a lie remains a lie whether you believe it to be true or not

(Next, he will try to CONFUSE the verb "lie" with the noun "lie")

"1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive."
(Merriam-Webster)

Here's the part you omitted:

"verb (2)...lied; lying" (Mirriam-Webster.com)

intransitive verb

That's the verb form, not the noun form. For example, if someone
believes something to be true, they are not "lying" and have not "lied". >Their belief in what they are saying, however, does not change the fact
that when their statement is false, it is still a "lie" (noun).

You just contradicted part 1. If the person believes it, it is never a
lie. It may be a false statement, but is not a lie.

Proof

oAnd for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that
they should believe a lie:o (2 Thessalonians 2:11, KJV 1900)

That's like choosing leaders for themselves to have their ears
tickled. They are going to hear what they want to hear.

Observe:

1) They "believe" a lie.

2) It is still called a "lie", even though they believe it.

Not at all.

Now we get to see if you really mean what you say when you claim to
believe the Bible is the final authority and that man-made sources do
not invalidate what the Bible teaches:

"to say or write something that is not true in order to deceive
someone:"
(Cambridge Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org c dictionary c lie)

1. That's not the Bible. That's a human source. You don't get to
invalidate what others say if it comes from a source other
than the Bible, then turn around and pretend to invalidate
what the Bible teaches from a human source.

There is nothing wrong with supporting the Scriptures with various
research. The Bible says to PROVE the Bible. And that is what we do.

2. Again, you cherry pick the verb form. Here's the context: lie
verb (SPEAK FALSELY) B1 [ I ] present participle lying | past
tense lied | past participle lied to say or write something
that is not true in order to deceive someone: (Cambridge
Dictionary)

Observe

oAnd for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that
they should believe a lie:o (2 Thessalonians 2:11, KJV 1900)

1) They "believe" the lie.

2) It is still called a "lie", even though they believe it's the truth.

The Bible shows that the noun form of "lie" refers to whether or not the >substance of the statement is true, not whether or not the person
believes it to be true.

I stand by the secular definitions of a lie. And it is said to
deceive. Thus the speaker knows it is NOT a true statement. That is a
lie. Period.

"A lie is an assertion that is believed to be false, typically used
with the intention of deceiving or misleading someone."
(Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org c wiki c Lie)

Again, human sources that are not inspired Scripture, do not invalidate
what the Bible teaches. Further, Wikipedia is not even a dictionary.
Whoever wrote that article got it wrong. you should submit an edit for that:

A lie (noun) refers to falsehood as content. It is something that does
not correspond to reality, whether or not anyone recognizes it as false. >Scripture uses this sense when it speaks of people obelieving a lieo (2 >Thessalonians 2:11, ESV). The lie remains false even when it is
sincerely believed.

To lie (verb) refers to an act of deception. It requires knowledge or >intent. The speaker knows the statement is false and presents it as true
in order to mislead. This is the only sense Watchtower James admits
exists, as he seeks to confuse a lie (falsehood) with lying (knowingly >trying to deceive).,

The Wikipedia definition wrongly blends these categories by defining a
lie as oan assertion that is believed to be false.o That definition fits
the verb (lying) but not the noun (a lie). A person can believe a lie >precisely because he does not believe it to be false. That is the
biblical problem of deception.

A clearer and more accurate distinction would read like this:

A lie (noun) is a false statement or falsehood that contradicts reality, >regardless of whether it is believed to be true or false.
To lie (verb) is to knowingly assert a falsehood as truth with the
intent to deceive.

"A lie is something that someone says or writes which they know is
untrue."

(Collins Dictionary
https://www.collinsdictionary.com c dictionary c lie)

Again, you are not citing an inspired source, or letting the Bible
define what the word means. Collins reflects common English usage rather >than inspired Bible revelation. It makes the same error as Wikipedia, >confusing the intent with the substance. A false statement is a lie in
and of itself.

Collins defines a lie (noun) as something owhich they know is untrue.o
That definition imports the intent of the speaker into the nature of the >statement itself. It effectively defines the noun by the verb. In doing
so, it excludes the very category Scripture explicitly names: believing
a lie.

Scripture uses olieo in an objective sense. A lie is falsehood in
contrast to truth, independent of the hearerAs awareness or the
speakerAs intent.

oThey exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served
the creature rather than the Creatoro (Romans 1:25, ESV).
The lie exists prior to belief and functions as an objective falsehood >replacing truth.

oTherefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe
what is falseo (2 Thessalonians 2:11, ESV).
People believe a lie precisely because they do not know it is false.

By contrast, Scripture treats lying as a moral action requiring
knowledge and intent.

oYou shall not bear false witness against your neighboro (Exodus 20:16, >ESV).
This command addresses deliberate deception, not mere error.

oLying lips are an abomination to the LORDo (Proverbs 12:22, ESV).
The guilt lies in knowingly speaking falsehood.

So the biblical categories remain clear:

A lie (noun): falsehood that contradicts reality, whether believed or not.
To lie (verb): knowingly speaking falsehood as truth in order to deceive.

Modern dictionaries often blur this distinction because they describe
usage, not ontology. Scripture defines reality more carefully. People
can speak lies. People can believe lies. In both cases, the falsehood
exists independently of human perception.

Truth does not depend on belief. Falsehood does not require intent to
exist. Scripture keeps those lines clean, even when modern definitions
do not.

Works Cited

Cambridge Dictionary. "LIE | definition in the Cambridge English >Dictionary". Dictionary, >https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/lie. Accessed 18 >December. 2025.

Mirriam-Webster.com. "LIE Definition ". Merriam-webster, >https://merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie. Accessed 18 December. 2025.

Boy, you have gone nuts about this "lie" business. What those
references say is what I go by. If you don't want to that is up to
you.

As some may say, "you can't see the forest through the trees".

"The phrase "
You can't see the forest for the trees" means someone is so focused on
small details (the trees) that they miss the bigger picture or overall situation (the forest). It describes being too involved in the
minutiae of a project or problem, preventing a strategic or broader understanding, and is often used to suggest taking a step back to gain perspective. " (https://www.google.com/search?q=%22you+can%27t+see+the+forrest+through+the+trees%22.&sa=Google+Search)

"THE GOOD NEWS ACCORDING TO JESUS
Episode 1: The True Light of the World
In this episode, see the amazing events that led up to JesusA birth.
Watch This Video".
See jw.org (12/19/2025)
James: zebrabible@proton.me
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.bible

========================================
Fri, 19 Dec 2025 21:56:49 -0500
<s4bbkklnjljfeiqitne1su38t3veobfti7@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

After Jesus was created, all the rest of the things were created
THROUGH Jesus.

Same stupid, refuted lies over and over, as if you can accomplish with
brain washing what you can't show from your twisted misrepresentations
of Scripture:

Romans 11:36
For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. (11:36, ESV)

This verse applies rCLthroughrCY directly to God the Father. If rCLthroughrCY meant created or secondary in nature, then the Father Himself would be a created intermediary. That collapses the Watchtower claim. rCLThroughrCY describes agency, not origin or rank.

1 Corinthians 8:6
Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and
for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all
things and through whom we exist. (8:6, ESV)

The Father stands as the source (rCLfrom whomrCY), yet Scripture still distinguishes roles without dividing deity. If rCLthroughrCY means created, then Paul would be contradicting himself by grounding all existence in
the Father while denying Him creative agency. The Watchtower reading
forces contradiction into the text.

Hebrews 2:10
For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in
bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering. (2:10, ESV)

The Father is described as the One rCLby whom all things exist.rCY Scripture assigns ultimate causation to the Father without excluding mediating
language elsewhere. This proves that rCLthroughrCY does not imply
inferiority or created status.

Hebrews 1:2
But in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed
the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. (1:2, ESV)

The same chapter later says the Son is eternal and unchanging (Hebrews 1:10rCo12). The Son cannot be both created and the Creator of all things. rCLThroughrCY here describes the SonrCOs role in creation, not His origin. The Watchtower must ignore the chapterrCOs own context to survive.

Colossians 1:16
For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisiblerCa all things were created through him and for him. (1:16, ESV)

rCLAll thingsrCY includes every created category. If the Son were created,
He would fall inside the category of rCLall things,rCY which Paul explicitly says were created through Him. Scripture leaves no room for the Son to
be part of creation.

Proverbs 3:19
The LORD by wisdom founded the earth; by understanding he established
the heavens. (3:19, ESV)

God creates rCLbyrCY wisdom. Wisdom functions as means, not as a created helper. The Watchtower argument collapses here, because Scripture
regularly speaks of God acting through attributes without implying those attributes are creatures.

Psalm 104:24
O LORD, how manifold are your works! In wisdom have you made them all;
the earth is full of your creatures. (104:24, ESV)

Again, God creates through wisdom. No one argues wisdom is a created
being. This shows that rCLthroughrCY language never defines ontology. It defines action.

Isaiah 44:24
Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb: rCLI am
the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who
spread out the earth by myself.rCY (44:24, ESV)

God declares He created alone. Scripture still speaks elsewhere of
creation through the Word. Therefore, rCLalonerCY does not exclude personal distinction within GodrCOs own being. It excludes created helpers. This
verse directly refutes the idea that the Son is a created assistant.

John 1:3
All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made
that was made. (1:3, ESV)

John closes every escape hatch. Anything that came into existence did so through the Word. If the Word Himself were created, He would have to
create Himself, which is impossible. The Watchtower doctrine
self-destructs on this verse alone.

Brief summary

Scripture applies rCLthroughrCY to God the Father, GodrCOs wisdom, and GodrCOs Word. rCLThroughrCY describes means of action, not created status. The Watchtower turns a functional term into an ontological claim, something
the Bible never does. When Scripture says all things were made through
the Son, it excludes the Son from the category of created things and
places Him on the Creator side of the line.
--
Have you heard the good news Christ died for our sins (rCa), and God
raised Him from the dead?

That Christ died for our sins shows we're sinners who deserve the death penalty. That God raised Him from the dead shows Christ's death
satisfied God's righteous demands against our sin (Romans 3:25; 1 John
2:1-2). This means God can now remain just, while forgiving you of your
sins, and saving you from eternal damnation.

On the basis of Christ's death and resurrection for our sins, call on
the name of the Lord to save you: "For 'everyone who calls on the name
of the Lord will be saved'" (Romans 10:13, ESV).

https://christrose.news/salvation

To automatically receive daily Bible teaching updates with colorful
images and website formatting, subscribe to my feed in a client like Thunderbird:

https://www.christrose.news/feeds/posts/default
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.bible

On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:38:45 -0600, Christ Rose
<usenet@christrose.news> wrote:

========================================
Wed, 17 Dec 2025 13:48:13 -0500
<k3q5kk18ck3hsslj0omschhmf2idd2sv5r@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

No one disputes that staurus means pole, fool!

Notice, he CITES me acknowledging the word "staurus" and that "staurus" >means "pole", as I have in every post on this subject. Later he PRETENDS
I tried to "get away" from the word, AS IF that would be necessary.

??? You are making a mountain out of a molehill. You are trying to
make me using devious psychological trickery of some kind. I am not
that cleaver. All I want to do is share what I consider Bible truths
usually with support.

The Bible also calls
boats "boats", not "oars". However, only a MORON would argue that boats
don't have oars, because it says "boats", not "oars". Romans hung
patibulum on the staurus, forming a cross. Your whole argument is STUPID >>> and UNNECESSARILY DIVISIVE.

Point: That the Bible says "boat" does NOT necessitate "boat without
oars". We know the boats had oars even though they are not
mentioned:

oWhen evening came, his disciples went down to the sea, got into
a boat...When they had rowed about three or four miles...o (John
6:16u19, ESV)

What's with your boat and oars thing? OK, I'll play along to some
degree.

The FACT that Bible boats had oars does not need to be stated to people
who already understood those boats had oars. Anyone who "rowed" such
boats would know that without it being stated.

I stay away from boats, because of swimming problems.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Bible boats did NOT have oars
merely because it says "boat", not "oars".

If you say so.

Likewise, there is no
evidence whatsoever that because the Bible says "staurus", it MUST ALSO
MEAN "and did NOT have a patibulum attached to it".

Well, finally on a Bible subject. I am only going by its definition.
Nothing more.

"AI Overview
-In the Bible,
stauros (sta????) is the original Greek word often translated as
"cross," but it literally means an upright stake, post, or pale," (google.com/define Bible stauros)--for info. Not a website.


It LITERALLY has no meaning of a patibulum. You can mentally add all
kinds of stuff to it, but that doesn't change its original literal
meaning. Now here is a cross. Does it mention the patibulum?

"1
a
: a structure consisting of an upright with a transverse beam used especially by the ancient Romans for execution"
(https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cross)

You can see, what makes a cross a cross and not a staurus, is the
transverse beam. So again, the bottom line is:
THE BIBLE SAYS IT WAS A SINGLE UPRIGHT POLE.

Well, according to you, I'm a Moron, because not all boats have oars.

o Who said "all boats"? Not me. I said "Bible" boats. You're not
arguing against what I said, but something I did not say.

o If you have to FABRICATE false arguments in order to appear to
be refuting them, how can you claim you are merely "mistaken"
in your claims, rather than INTENTIONALLY trying to deceive
people?

I am just going by the Bible. I have no ulterior deceptive motives or
anything. I only want to share Bible truths. But I will support them
if challenged.

o You prove the point by trying to confuse "Bible" boats with
"all" boats, then pretending that refutes the evidence.

More rambling about boats.

Since the cross predates Christianity and is a pagan symbol, it is
amazing they did that. Instead of truth, they sought ritual to please
the churches. They didn't please God.

o The act of bowing was used in pagan worship, yet it is commanded in
worship of the true God (Psalm 95:6; Daniel 3:5u18).

BOW | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary
Cambridge Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org c dictionary c bow
to bend the head or body forward as a way of showing respect,
expressing thanks, or greeting someone: [ T ] We knelt and bowed our
heads ...

Thus bowing does not necessarily mean worship:

"Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com c dictionary c worship
1. to honor or show reverence for as a divine being or supernatural
power 2. to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or
devotion"

Thus bowing may or may not be a part of worshipping.

o Temples were used for pagan deities, yet God instructed Israel to
build a temple for His worship (1 Kings 6:1u38; Acts 17:24).

Similar logic: Pagans wore clothes. Christians wore clothes. Thus
Christians are pagans. You have a God-given brain, use it. (I don't
mean it sarcastically)

o Sacrifices were offered to pagan gods, yet sacrifices were also
commanded by God in the Old Testament (Leviticus 1:1u9).

See above about cloths.

o The term ogospelo (euangelion) was used in imperial Rome to
announce CaesarAs victories, yet it was adopted in the New
Testament for the message of Christ (Mark 1:1; Romans 1:16).

See above about cloths.

o Baptism was used in other religions, yet it is a Christian
ordinance instituted by Christ (Matthew 3:6; Matthew 28:19).

o The Bible refers to pagan gods as "theos" (1 Corinthians 8:5), and
also refers to the one true God as "theos" (John 1:1).

See above about cloths. You seem to be applying anti-Christian
statements. Why? Have you changed?

Conclusion

o Actions and things don't become pagan by association, simply
because someone who seeks to poison people's minds with lies
points out that pagans once used them.

See above about cloths.

o A "lie" remains a "lie", even when people believe it:

oAnd with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that
perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that
they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them
strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:o (2
Thessalonians 2:10u11, KJV 1900)

Observe: They "believe" a "lie". The fact they "believe" it doesn't
change the "lie" into "truth" or "unintentional mistake". If you parrot >falsehoods (lies), what you are saying remains a "lie", whether you
believe it to be true or not. Don't try to confuse "lie" (falsehood)
with "lying" (knowingly trying to deceive people).

Boy, are you off the correct road. I have already showed you the REAL definition of a lie by Webster and others. If you want to make up your
own definition, that is up to you. I will go by the true references.

You can't get away from the bottom line. THE BIBLE USES STAURUS TO
DESCRIBE JESUS' EXECUTION INSTRUMENT. "Come hell or high water", that
is always the base line.

To begin, no one needs to "get away" from the fact the Bible says
"staurus", to understand Romans hung patibulum ON THE STAURUS.

Second, it is not I who seek to get away from the bottom line, but you:

o You PRETEND it's necessary to "get away" from "staurus" to
understand Romans hung patibulum ON THE STAURUS. This is pure
falsehood (lies). It's like claiming Bible boats couldn't have
oars, because the Bible says "boats" not "oars". You don't have
to tell people who "rowed" these boats that they had "oars",
for them to understand they had oars. When the Bible says
"staurus", that does not equal "and didn't have a patibulum".

o You CITE VERBATIM: "No one disputes that staurus means pole,
fool!", then PRETEND I tried to "get away" from the word
"staurus" after you cite me acknowledging it.

o You PRETEND that if "all" boats don't have oars (something I
never claimed), it somehow refutes the fact "Bible" boats had
oars (what I actually claimed). It does not. The Bible calls
them "boats", but does not deny they had oars. That's how they
"rowed" them. Thus again you promote a lie.

o You are not arguing against the ACTUAL points being raised,
because you know your view loses. Instead, you MISREPRESENT the
views and try to REFRAME them with straw-men of your own
invention.

Remember, a falsehood is a lie, whether people believe it to be true or
not. If you promote falsehoods, you promote lies.

Conclusion

The fact the Bible uses "staurus" provides ZERO EVIDENCE that Romans did
NOT hang patibulum on the staurus. We know from multiple historical
sources that they did. Trying to maintain an ongoing argument about this
is like trying to claim Bible boats did not have oars because the Bible
says "boat", not "oars".

The very bottom of the bottom line is what it SAYS, not what it
doesn't say. Scriptually, Jesus was executed on a pole. Period.

Crosses predated Christianity by pagan nations. Thus crosses are
highly pagan icons and to use them for Christianity, is unscriptural.

"THE GOOD NEWS ACCORDING TO JESUS
Episode 1: The True Light of the World
In this episode, see the amazing events that led up to JesusA birth.
Watch This Video".
See jw.org (12/20/2025)
James: zebrabible@proton.me
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.bible

On 12/20/2025 10:02 AM, James wrote:

On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:38:45 -0600, Christ Rose
<usenet@christrose.news> wrote:

========================================
Wed, 17 Dec 2025 13:48:13 -0500
<k3q5kk18ck3hsslj0omschhmf2idd2sv5r@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

No one disputes that staurus means pole, fool!

Notice, he CITES me acknowledging the word "staurus" and that "staurus"
means "pole", as I have in every post on this subject. Later he PRETENDS
I tried to "get away" from the word, AS IF that would be necessary.

??? You are making a mountain out of a molehill. You are trying to
make me using devious psychological trickery of some kind. I am not
that cleaver. All I want to do is share what I consider Bible truths
usually with support.

The Bible also calls
boats "boats", not "oars". However, only a MORON would argue that boats >>>> don't have oars, because it says "boats", not "oars". Romans hung
patibulum on the staurus, forming a cross. Your whole argument is STUPID >>>> and UNNECESSARILY DIVISIVE.

Point: That the Bible says "boat" does NOT necessitate "boat without
oars". We know the boats had oars even though they are not
mentioned:

rCLWhen evening came, his disciples went down to the sea, got into
a boat...When they had rowed about three or four miles...rCY (John
6:16rCo19, ESV)

What's with your boat and oars thing? OK, I'll play along to some
degree.

The FACT that Bible boats had oars does not need to be stated to people
who already understood those boats had oars. Anyone who "rowed" such
boats would know that without it being stated.

I stay away from boats, because of swimming problems.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Bible boats did NOT have oars
merely because it says "boat", not "oars".

If you say so.

Likewise, there is no
evidence whatsoever that because the Bible says "staurus", it MUST ALSO
MEAN "and did NOT have a patibulum attached to it".

Well, finally on a Bible subject. I am only going by its definition.
Nothing more.

"AI Overview
-In the Bible,
stauros (sta????) is the original Greek word often translated as
"cross," but it literally means an upright stake, post, or pale," (google.com/define Bible stauros)--for info. Not a website.

It LITERALLY has no meaning of a patibulum. You can mentally add all
kinds of stuff to it, but that doesn't change its original literal
meaning. Now here is a cross. Does it mention the patibulum?

"1
a
: a structure consisting of an upright with a transverse beam used especially by the ancient Romans for execution"
(https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cross)

You can see, what makes a cross a cross and not a staurus, is the
transverse beam. So again, the bottom line is:
THE BIBLE SAYS IT WAS A SINGLE UPRIGHT POLE.

Well, according to you, I'm a Moron, because not all boats have oars.

rCo Who said "all boats"? Not me. I said "Bible" boats. You're not
arguing against what I said, but something I did not say.

rCo If you have to FABRICATE false arguments in order to appear to
be refuting them, how can you claim you are merely "mistaken"
in your claims, rather than INTENTIONALLY trying to deceive
people?

I am just going by the Bible. I have no ulterior deceptive motives or anything. I only want to share Bible truths. But I will support them
if challenged.

rCo You prove the point by trying to confuse "Bible" boats with
"all" boats, then pretending that refutes the evidence.

More rambling about boats.

Since the cross predates Christianity and is a pagan symbol, it is
amazing they did that. Instead of truth, they sought ritual to please
the churches. They didn't please God.

rCo The act of bowing was used in pagan worship, yet it is commanded in >> worship of the true God (Psalm 95:6; Daniel 3:5rCo18).

BOW | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary
Cambridge Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org rC| dictionary rC| bow
to bend the head or body forward as a way of showing respect,
expressing thanks, or greeting someone: [ T ] We knelt and bowed our
heads ...

Thus bowing does not necessarily mean worship:

"Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com rC| dictionary rC| worship
1. to honor or show reverence for as a divine being or supernatural
power 2. to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or
devotion"

Thus bowing may or may not be a part of worshipping.

rCo Temples were used for pagan deities, yet God instructed Israel to
build a temple for His worship (1 Kings 6:1rCo38; Acts 17:24).

Similar logic: Pagans wore clothes. Christians wore clothes. Thus
Christians are pagans. You have a God-given brain, use it. (I don't
mean it sarcastically)

rCo Sacrifices were offered to pagan gods, yet sacrifices were also
commanded by God in the Old Testament (Leviticus 1:1rCo9).

See above about cloths.

rCo The term rCLgospelrCY (euangelion) was used in imperial Rome to
announce CaesarrCOs victories, yet it was adopted in the New
Testament for the message of Christ (Mark 1:1; Romans 1:16).

See above about cloths.

rCo Baptism was used in other religions, yet it is a Christian
ordinance instituted by Christ (Matthew 3:6; Matthew 28:19).

rCo The Bible refers to pagan gods as "theos" (1 Corinthians 8:5), and >> also refers to the one true God as "theos" (John 1:1).

See above about cloths. You seem to be applying anti-Christian
statements. Why? Have you changed?

Conclusion

rCo Actions and things don't become pagan by association, simply
because someone who seeks to poison people's minds with lies
points out that pagans once used them.

See above about cloths.

rCo A "lie" remains a "lie", even when people believe it:

rCLAnd with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that
perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that
they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them
strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:rCY (2
Thessalonians 2:10rCo11, KJV 1900)

Observe: They "believe" a "lie". The fact they "believe" it doesn't
change the "lie" into "truth" or "unintentional mistake". If you parrot
falsehoods (lies), what you are saying remains a "lie", whether you
believe it to be true or not. Don't try to confuse "lie" (falsehood)
with "lying" (knowingly trying to deceive people).

Boy, are you off the correct road. I have already showed you the REAL definition of a lie by Webster and others. If you want to make up your
own definition, that is up to you. I will go by the true references.

You can't get away from the bottom line. THE BIBLE USES STAURUS TO
DESCRIBE JESUS' EXECUTION INSTRUMENT. "Come hell or high water", that
is always the base line.

To begin, no one needs to "get away" from the fact the Bible says
"staurus", to understand Romans hung patibulum ON THE STAURUS.

Second, it is not I who seek to get away from the bottom line, but you:

rCo You PRETEND it's necessary to "get away" from "staurus" to
understand Romans hung patibulum ON THE STAURUS. This is pure
falsehood (lies). It's like claiming Bible boats couldn't have
oars, because the Bible says "boats" not "oars". You don't have
to tell people who "rowed" these boats that they had "oars",
for them to understand they had oars. When the Bible says
"staurus", that does not equal "and didn't have a patibulum".

rCo You CITE VERBATIM: "No one disputes that staurus means pole,
fool!", then PRETEND I tried to "get away" from the word
"staurus" after you cite me acknowledging it.

rCo You PRETEND that if "all" boats don't have oars (something I
never claimed), it somehow refutes the fact "Bible" boats had
oars (what I actually claimed). It does not. The Bible calls
them "boats", but does not deny they had oars. That's how they
"rowed" them. Thus again you promote a lie.

rCo You are not arguing against the ACTUAL points being raised,
because you know your view loses. Instead, you MISREPRESENT the
views and try to REFRAME them with straw-men of your own
invention.

Remember, a falsehood is a lie, whether people believe it to be true or
not. If you promote falsehoods, you promote lies.

Conclusion

The fact the Bible uses "staurus" provides ZERO EVIDENCE that Romans did
NOT hang patibulum on the staurus. We know from multiple historical
sources that they did. Trying to maintain an ongoing argument about this
is like trying to claim Bible boats did not have oars because the Bible
says "boat", not "oars".

The very bottom of the bottom line is what it SAYS, not what it
doesn't say.

The Bible does NOT SAY "without crossbeams". YOU say that, based on
principles you here admit are erroneous.
--
Have you heard the good news Christ died for our sins (rCa), and God
raised Him from the dead?

That Christ died for our sins shows we're sinners who deserve the death penalty. That God raised Him from the dead shows Christ's death
satisfied God's righteous demands against our sin (Romans 3:25; 1 John
2:1-2). This means God can now remain just, while forgiving you of your
sins, and saving you from eternal damnation.

On the basis of Christ's death and resurrection for our sins, call on
the name of the Lord to save you: "For 'everyone who calls on the name
of the Lord will be saved'" (Romans 10:13, ESV).

https://christrose.news/salvation

To automatically receive daily Bible teaching updates with colorful
images and website formatting, subscribe to my feed in a client like Thunderbird:

https://www.christrose.news/feeds/posts/default
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.bible

On Sat, 20 Dec 2025 12:04:13 -0600, Christ Rose
<usenet@christrose.news> wrote:

On 12/20/2025 10:02 AM, James wrote:

On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:38:45 -0600, Christ Rose
<usenet@christrose.news> wrote:

========================================
Wed, 17 Dec 2025 13:48:13 -0500
<k3q5kk18ck3hsslj0omschhmf2idd2sv5r@4ax.com>
Watchtower James <James> wrote:
========================================

No one disputes that staurus means pole, fool!

Notice, he CITES me acknowledging the word "staurus" and that "staurus"
means "pole", as I have in every post on this subject. Later he PRETENDS >>> I tried to "get away" from the word, AS IF that would be necessary.

??? You are making a mountain out of a molehill. You are trying to
make me using devious psychological trickery of some kind. I am not
that cleaver. All I want to do is share what I consider Bible truths
usually with support.

The Bible also calls
boats "boats", not "oars". However, only a MORON would argue that boats >>>>> don't have oars, because it says "boats", not "oars". Romans hung
patibulum on the staurus, forming a cross. Your whole argument is STUPID >>>>> and UNNECESSARILY DIVISIVE.

Point: That the Bible says "boat" does NOT necessitate "boat without
oars". We know the boats had oars even though they are not
mentioned:

oWhen evening came, his disciples went down to the sea, got into
a boat...When they had rowed about three or four miles...o (John
6:16u19, ESV)

What's with your boat and oars thing? OK, I'll play along to some
degree.

The FACT that Bible boats had oars does not need to be stated to people
who already understood those boats had oars. Anyone who "rowed" such
boats would know that without it being stated.

I stay away from boats, because of swimming problems.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Bible boats did NOT have oars
merely because it says "boat", not "oars".

If you say so.

Likewise, there is no
evidence whatsoever that because the Bible says "staurus", it MUST ALSO
MEAN "and did NOT have a patibulum attached to it".

Well, finally on a Bible subject. I am only going by its definition.
Nothing more.

"AI Overview
-In the Bible,
stauros (sta????) is the original Greek word often translated as
"cross," but it literally means an upright stake, post, or pale,"
(google.com/define Bible stauros)--for info. Not a website.


It LITERALLY has no meaning of a patibulum. You can mentally add all
kinds of stuff to it, but that doesn't change its original literal
meaning. Now here is a cross. Does it mention the patibulum?

"1
a
: a structure consisting of an upright with a transverse beam used especially by the ancient Romans for execution"
(https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cross)

You can see, what makes a cross a cross and not a staurus, is the
transverse beam. So again, the bottom line is:
THE BIBLE SAYS IT WAS A SINGLE UPRIGHT POLE.

Well, according to you, I'm a Moron, because not all boats have oars.

o Who said "all boats"? Not me. I said "Bible" boats. You're not
arguing against what I said, but something I did not say.

o If you have to FABRICATE false arguments in order to appear to
be refuting them, how can you claim you are merely "mistaken"
in your claims, rather than INTENTIONALLY trying to deceive
people?

I am just going by the Bible. I have no ulterior deceptive motives or
anything. I only want to share Bible truths. But I will support them
if challenged.

o You prove the point by trying to confuse "Bible" boats with
"all" boats, then pretending that refutes the evidence.

More rambling about boats.

Since the cross predates Christianity and is a pagan symbol, it is
amazing they did that. Instead of truth, they sought ritual to please
the churches. They didn't please God.

o The act of bowing was used in pagan worship, yet it is commanded in >>> worship of the true God (Psalm 95:6; Daniel 3:5u18).

BOW | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary
Cambridge Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org c dictionary c bow
to bend the head or body forward as a way of showing respect,
expressing thanks, or greeting someone: [ T ] We knelt and bowed our
heads ...

Thus bowing does not necessarily mean worship:

"Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com c dictionary c worship
1. to honor or show reverence for as a divine being or supernatural
power 2. to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or
devotion"

Thus bowing may or may not be a part of worshipping.

o Temples were used for pagan deities, yet God instructed Israel to
build a temple for His worship (1 Kings 6:1u38; Acts 17:24).

Similar logic: Pagans wore clothes. Christians wore clothes. Thus
Christians are pagans. You have a God-given brain, use it. (I don't
mean it sarcastically)

o Sacrifices were offered to pagan gods, yet sacrifices were also
commanded by God in the Old Testament (Leviticus 1:1u9).

See above about cloths.

o The term ogospelo (euangelion) was used in imperial Rome to
announce CaesarAs victories, yet it was adopted in the New
Testament for the message of Christ (Mark 1:1; Romans 1:16).

See above about cloths.

o Baptism was used in other religions, yet it is a Christian
ordinance instituted by Christ (Matthew 3:6; Matthew 28:19).

o The Bible refers to pagan gods as "theos" (1 Corinthians 8:5), and >>> also refers to the one true God as "theos" (John 1:1).

See above about cloths. You seem to be applying anti-Christian
statements. Why? Have you changed?

Conclusion

o Actions and things don't become pagan by association, simply
because someone who seeks to poison people's minds with lies
points out that pagans once used them.

See above about cloths.

o A "lie" remains a "lie", even when people believe it:

oAnd with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that
perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that
they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them
strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:o (2
Thessalonians 2:10u11, KJV 1900)

Observe: They "believe" a "lie". The fact they "believe" it doesn't
change the "lie" into "truth" or "unintentional mistake". If you parrot
falsehoods (lies), what you are saying remains a "lie", whether you
believe it to be true or not. Don't try to confuse "lie" (falsehood)
with "lying" (knowingly trying to deceive people).

Boy, are you off the correct road. I have already showed you the REAL
definition of a lie by Webster and others. If you want to make up your
own definition, that is up to you. I will go by the true references.

You can't get away from the bottom line. THE BIBLE USES STAURUS TO
DESCRIBE JESUS' EXECUTION INSTRUMENT. "Come hell or high water", that
is always the base line.

To begin, no one needs to "get away" from the fact the Bible says
"staurus", to understand Romans hung patibulum ON THE STAURUS.

Second, it is not I who seek to get away from the bottom line, but you:

o You PRETEND it's necessary to "get away" from "staurus" to
understand Romans hung patibulum ON THE STAURUS. This is pure
falsehood (lies). It's like claiming Bible boats couldn't have
oars, because the Bible says "boats" not "oars". You don't have
to tell people who "rowed" these boats that they had "oars",
for them to understand they had oars. When the Bible says
"staurus", that does not equal "and didn't have a patibulum".

o You CITE VERBATIM: "No one disputes that staurus means pole,
fool!", then PRETEND I tried to "get away" from the word
"staurus" after you cite me acknowledging it.

o You PRETEND that if "all" boats don't have oars (something I
never claimed), it somehow refutes the fact "Bible" boats had
oars (what I actually claimed). It does not. The Bible calls
them "boats", but does not deny they had oars. That's how they
"rowed" them. Thus again you promote a lie.

o You are not arguing against the ACTUAL points being raised,
because you know your view loses. Instead, you MISREPRESENT the
views and try to REFRAME them with straw-men of your own
invention.

Remember, a falsehood is a lie, whether people believe it to be true or
not. If you promote falsehoods, you promote lies.

Conclusion

The fact the Bible uses "staurus" provides ZERO EVIDENCE that Romans did >>> NOT hang patibulum on the staurus. We know from multiple historical
sources that they did. Trying to maintain an ongoing argument about this >>> is like trying to claim Bible boats did not have oars because the Bible
says "boat", not "oars".

The very bottom of the bottom line is what it SAYS, not what it
doesn't say.

The Bible does NOT SAY "without crossbeams". YOU say that, based on >principles you here admit are erroneous.

It also doesn't say without trapezoids, and squares and triangles or
anything else you want to dredge up. Staurus is just an upright pole.
That's what the Bible says, and that's what I believe the Bible
writers of the `1st century knew.

Oh, and be careful of too much Christmas cheer. At this time of year,
I am so glad I am a JW. It used to drive me nuts buying gifts on a
very limited budget. Besides, Jesus said there is more happiness in
giving than in receiving.

Despite our great differences, you are one of God's creations, so have
a great evening. I'll sure give it a try.

"THE GOOD NEWS ACCORDING TO JESUS
Episode 1: The True Light of the World
In this episode, see the amazing events that led up to JesusA birth.
Watch This Video".
See jw.org (12/21/2025)
James: zebrabible@proton.me

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2