thirdwitness: The preaching work is not over yet.
From your reply of my question, am I correct in surmising that every person needs to hear from a Jehovah's witness before Armageddon comes?
steve
The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible
by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
stevenyc
-
stevenyc
[repeat of above post, don't know why!]
-
OUTLAW
3RD TROLL..If your religion`s message is so important,people would be knocking on your door..They are not..You,your religion and the organization that runs your religion,are a "Fraud"..Live with it...OUTLAW
-
thirdwitness
So what is the answer to your $64,000 question? (I know you don't take me serious, but I am being serious.) Go ahead, answer it.
What group or religion are truly Christ-like, practicing Christianity, and thus following Christ's example? A close examination will easily reveal the proof and leave no doubt.
First of all, ask yourself, who did Christ worship? Did he worship a triune God? Did he worship a nameless god? Did he worship a God who he believed he was equal to? Did he worship a God who punishes people in hellfire forever and ever? Anyone who has ever been one of Jehovah's Witnesses or have studied with them know the truth about this matter. Jesus worship the only true God whose name is Jehovah. He did not worship a triune God. He did not make himself equal to God. And he made God's name known to others. Who is following Christ's example in doing this today. Since most all religions teach that God is a trinity we can easily illiminate 90 percent of the religions of the world today.
Of the remaining few who do not teach the trinity how many make known God's name Jehovah? Recently on another DB someone gave us a list of obscure religions that use God's name. On the list was some deluded religions such as the Living Waters Organization headed by Donald Burney and the Rastafarians. Are they making God's name manifest in the manner that Christ did? Are they preaching the good news of Jehovah's Kingdom and what it will accomplish? Of course not. This brings us to another requirement of Christians.
True Christians preach the good news of God's Kingdom and tell others about what it will accomplish in sanctifying God's sovereignty and restoring paradise to the earth. Of those few obscure religions that actually use God's name how many of them preach the kingdom as true Christians would do? Who only is preaching this kingdom worldwide? What group is known worldwide for their zealous preaching of God's Kingdom? When is the last time you were visited by someone on that obscure list such as a member of the church of Yahweh, David Burney, or a Rastafarian?
Jesus said that true followers of his, true Christians, would have love among themselves. How many religions display this Christlike love along with the other above mentioned requirements of Christians? Most religions will go kill fellow 'brothers' of the same religion in times of war. It is only JWs who have this Christlike love and refuse to kill one another because they are of another race or nationality along with the other above mentioned beliefs. This worldwide brotherhood of true Christians also help one another. If you were to go to a foreign country that hated members of your race or nationality who could you seek out that would take you in and protect you as a brother?
Christianity is the true religion. And you will only find one group practicing Christianity today. Just these few points alone prove what religion today is practicing true Christianity. -
jayhawk1
I ask, not because I am about to launch into "the early deciples didn't go door to door," like you just said. When I left in the late 1990's the Watchtower Corp was proud of the over 1 Billion hours the publishers put in the preaching work. Now that's a lot of hours for certain! But how many followers did they gain from it? I have no concrete numbers, I am going strictly by what I saw in my former congregation, but it did not yield many new recruits. At least in this area, I would say at least 85% (again guessing based on what I witnessed) was relatives and children of established families in the JW religion.
Now, I have no idea where you are, Thirdwitness, but be honest, what would you guess is the percentage of JW recruits from the door to door work in your area? My guess is the percentage worldwide of recruits not having relatives already in the JW religion is not very high. It does not speak well for the 1 Billion plus hours each year.
Another thing to consider, how many in your territory really know what JWs teach? With all the work and literature produced by Watchtower Corp, one would think the knowledge of JWs would be very high. I know when I went door to door, many of the people I talked to didn't know anything signifigant about what the JWs taught. Facts show even with the 1 Billion plus hours per year spent in the door to door work has not even helped that cause. My guess would be we on this board make you think more about what you believe than anybody you have spoken to at a door.
Look, I am not trying to change your opinion on your beliefs. Believe me, I respect your right to believe in the JW religion. I hope for your sake your work has not been without reward. I just hope you consider my points of view as I consider yours.
-
jayhawk1
As regards the $64,000 question, your media person at Bethel (J.R. Brown) does not share your point of view. I have the audio recordings with him saying JWs are not God's only chosen religion. Look it up on this board, he said it in early July of this year.
-
stevenyc
Okay my PC is going nuts!
Let me try again.
thirdwitness: The preaching work is not over yet.
From your reply of my question, am I correct in surmising that every person does not need to hear from a Jehovah's witness before Armageddon comes?
steve
-
AuldSoul
thirdwitness: I listen to no man, only God.
Sheez! You sure could have saved a LOT of grief if you'd said that at the beginning. I thought you said you weren't an apostate.
Or are you only an immature Christian?
Watchtower August 1, 2001, p. 14, par. 8
8 First, since “oneness” is to be observed, a mature Christian must be in unity and full harmony with fellow believers as far as faith and knowledge are concerned. He does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbor private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding. Rather, he has complete confidence in the truth as it is revealed by Jehovah God through his Son, Jesus Christ, and “the faithful and discreet slave.” By regularly taking in the spiritual food provided “at the proper time”—through Christian publications, meetings, assemblies, and conventions—we can be sure that we maintain “oneness” with fellow Christians in faith and knowledge.—Matthew 24:45.You don't only listen to God according to the tenets of your religion. In fact, if you said to the Circuit Overseer what you just said in this forum, you would be disfellowshipped if you did not repent. You listen to LOTS of men, you just confused them with God.
AuldSoul
-
AuldSoul
thirdwitness: What group or religion are truly Christ-like?
I haven't ever encountered a group that is Christ-like. Christ was an individual, and only individuals can be like an individual. Didn't you know? Organizations can't be individuals, and can therefore NEVER be Christ-like.
I know many individuals who I consider to be Christ-like, some are even among JWs. You are not one of them. Of Jesus, the Bible says there was no "deception found in his mouth." This could not honestly be said of you.
AuldSoul
-
AlanF
In his post # 346 thirdwitness wrote some nonsense that would be amusing if weren't for the fact that some 6 million cult members actually believe it:
: To the statement: About as many people have died in earthquakes since 1914 as all the years previous to 1914.
: AlanF said: False. According to the incomplete list you posted, and using the larger of the two figures given, there were about:
:: 2.0 million deaths pre-1914.
:: 1.5 million deaths post-1914.
: If you use the highest total for the 1976 China earthquakes of 655,000 then both figures are around 2 million.
So what? Either way, the list you gave is incomplete, and according to that more accurate list, my answer stands.
: And even if you don't it is still true that deaths from earthquakes since 1914 are about equal to deaths from earthquakes in the centuries before 1914.
Only according to the incorrect list you posted. This is of no value at all.
: And it has only been 92 years since 1914. The total will continue to rise. But the total before 1914 will get no higher.
LOL! If you don't understand how stupid an argument this is, then I can't help you.
:: However, according to the list I extracted from the National Geophyscial Data Center, which has a much bigger and generally more complete database, the figures are about:
:: 6.4 million deaths pre-1914.
:: 1.6 million deaths post-1914.
: The National Geophysical Date Center must include suspect or unproven earthquakes with total deaths guessed at.
This cuts both ways, laughing-boy. The way to know for sure is to consult a variety of catalogs, and the NGDC catalog includes every entry from every catalog they can get their hands on.
: I say this because of their inclusion of the 1737 disaster in Calcutta India killing 300,000 which the USGS does not include siting it as being more likely a typhoon.
Fair enough. But if you claim that any of the NGDC figures are wrong, then it's up to you to prove it. The USGS list, by the way, does not claim to be complete.
You're getting beyond ridiculous even for a JW now, claiming that you know earthquake statistics better than the professionals.
: But even using your figures you provide here it is still a major increase. From the 1st century until 1914 we have an average of 3300 to 3400 deaths per year. From 1914 onward we have an average of over 17,000 deaths per year.
LOL! You've committed exactly the fallacy that I showed both the USGS and the NGDC warned against -- using their statistical figures to claim an increase in quakes. Both explained why this is a fallacy -- it ignores the proven fact that a great many unrecorded quakes happened before instrumentation came on board around 1900, and even more so around 1960. Why do you think you know better than these professionals? Have you studied the matter beyond the level of treatments in Awake!? I think not.
One fallacy in your argument is to think that it's proper to average a very incomplete number of deaths in some period and compare it to a nearly complete number for another, and think that you've actually done something worthwhile. You're knowingly distorting the figures because you know very well that data is increasingly incomplete as you go back further from 1900.
Another fallacy is one that I've repeatedly explained to you, yet you keep ignoring. Because population has increased fairly steadily since the Black Death of the 14th century, you can take any two time periods at all since about 1500 and claim that, because the population is bigger in the one than the other, any kind of disaster that affects people based on population density is worse in the period with the bigger population. Therefore, 1614 is just as good as 1714 is just as good as 1814 is just as good as 1914 is just as good as 2014 for 'proving' that "the time of the end" began in whatever year you pick.
A third fallacy is in continuing to ignore the fact that when considering statistics of things occurring over a period of time, the only proper measure of "goodness" or "badness" is per capita. This is easy to prove. Seventy years ago there were roughly 50,000 Jehovah's Witnesses on the planet, and today there are roughly 6.5 million of them. From then until now, about 1% per year have committed gross sexual immorality (the actual percentage may vary a bit, but let's keep things simple). So, 70 years ago, 500 JWs a year were grossly sexually immoral, whereas today 65,000 JWs a year are grossly sexually immoral. Therefore, the problem of gross sexual immorality among JW has gotten much, much worse since the 1930s -- 130 times worse! Well, hasn't it?
You also continue to ignore the unarguable fact that both famine and pestilence were significantly less severe in the 20th century than in the 19th in absolute numbers, and less severe by far on a per capita basis.
: I was thinking of going thru the list of earthquakes by the National Geophyical Data Center and seeing how many are substantiated but in view of these facts, whats the use?
You might learn something.
This goes to show how lazy you are, and that you're afraid to put your money where your mouth is by dealing with real data, as opposed to the pap you pull from Watchtower publications.
Some years ago I put together some statistics on earthquakes using a variety of sources, including the 1988 version of the NEIS (National Earthquake Information Service; now under the National Geophysical Data Center) catalog on CDROM. I examined the 20th century for trends in frequency and magnitude. There were no significant trends. I compared the period 1915-1983 with 1715-1783 and 1847-1914 in terms of number of deaths. The result was that, on average, about 17,500 people died per year in the 1915-1983 period, while about 20,000 and 17,400 died annually in the latter two periods. These variations are statistically insignificant, although it should be noted that pre-1900 data are increasingly incomplete as one goes back further in time.
You can find a pdf of the informational charts here: http://home.comcast.net/~alanf00/essays/Quake_Charts.pdf
: On the statement: More people have died in wars since 1914 than all the years from the 1st century until 1914.
: AlanF said: False. Depending on what figures you believe, post-1914 there have been on the order of 80-100 million killed. In my long post on earthquakes and "the composite sign" -- which you ignored -- on the order of 80-90 million were killed just in the wars I listed, and this list was far from complete. A complete list would show a hell of a lot more.
: You listed the major wars that occured prior to 1914.
Once again you misrepresent what I posted. I clearly stated that what I listed was only a small part of what could be listed.
: And You just proved my point.
False, since you misrepresented my statements.
: Using your figures 80-100 million since 1914 is about the same as 80-90 million prior to 1914. If you want to add some of the wars you left out prior to 1914 the increase will not be that great.
Prove it.
: But for argument sake lets double your figure for wars before 1914 and make it 200 million. And lets use the 100 million figure for deaths after 1914 by war. What do we find?
: Wars before 1914 killed an average of around 100,000 per year.
: Wars after 1914 killed an average of over 1 million per year.
By the same fallacious misuse of statistics, Jehovah's Witnesses have 130 times worse problems with sexual immorality than they did 70 years ago.
: What more needs to be said except that Jesus words that there will be earthquakes in one place after another and nation will rise against nation has clearly happened on an unprecedented scale since 1914.
There's a lot more to be said. I've said it several times before, and you simply keep ignoring it.
For example, Jesus never predicted that such things would be signs of the end. He said quite the opposite -- "Look out that nobody misleads you" with such "signs", because although such things would happen between the time he spoke and whenever the end came, they should not to pay attention to them because "the end is not yet". Why might his followers think that such things were harbingers or signs of the end? Because they were standard signs used by Jewish and other apocalyptic teachers for centuries. It was only after warning people not to pay attention to such things that Jesus actually mentioned "the sign" that the disciples had asked about -- the sign of the Son of man appearing in heaven. Cf. Matthew 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27, Luke 21:25-28.
Of course, you're going to ignore almost everything in this post, just as you always do. You'll show that you're too lazy and scholastically dishonest to read through enough to actually understand it, and then claim that it's all nonsense simply because you failed to read it through. But that's par for the course for defenders of the cult of Jehovah's Witnesses.
AlanF