JW's would like to see their leader (Ted Jaracz) drive around in a Pope-mobile waving at district assemblies. Since that is unlikely to happen, they turn Catholic to live out the fantasy.
I Do Not Understand Why JWs Leave & Become Catholics!
by minimus 239 Replies latest jw friends
-
Mary
-
FlyingHighNow
JW's would like to see their leader (Ted Jaracz) drive around in a Pope-mobile waving at district assemblies. Since that is unlikely to happen, they turn Catholic to live out the fantasy.
<.........laughing too, but for different reasons.
-
Tom Cabeen
Hi Mary,
Thanks listing some of the things that you believe to be inconsistent with early Christianity. But you may have misunderstood my question. I wondered about the basis upon which you make the comparison. Is it based on the New Testament, as you understand it? On examination of historical records? On general consensus? Or on some other basis?
I ask this because sometimes people sincerely believe something to be the case based on, for example, their understanding of the Scriptures. A sincere JW might make the following statement: "Taking blood transfusions is unscriptural." Yet other people who study and hold the very same Scriptures in high regard, might say "I see nothing unscriptural about a blood transfusion." In that case, deciding who is right usually has to be on some other basis than "the plain meaning" of some Scriptural passages.
One of these issues is of great importance: the idea that the bread and wine of the Eucharist become Jesus' body and blood. The Scriptures bearing on the subject have been understood in different ways by Christians: Prior to the Reformation, virtually all Christians took them to mean one thing. After the Reformation, virtually all Protestants took them to mean exactly the opposite. Can it be resolved? If so, on what basis?
Rather than use this forum for explaining Catholic doctrines and their basis, I would be more than happy to address any issues you may be wondering about off forum. If you are interested, feel free to IM me. If not, that is fine, too.
Best wishes,
Tom -
minimus
Tom, you didn't address Mary's valid points. (Or at least I didn't get it)..... Let's stick with the NT for starters, if you will.
-
mouthy
just because I question why people would accept the Catholic religion doesn't mean I disrespect them or judge them. People have the right to worship as they choose. I respect that, though I may never accept their belief that their church is the way to go.I agree with that statement a 100percent
-
Mary
Hi Mary, Thanks listing some of the things that you believe to be inconsistent with early Christianity. But you may have misunderstood my question. I wondered about the basis upon which you make the comparison. Is it based on the New Testament, as you understand it? On examination of historical records? On general consensus? Or on some other basis?
A combination of reading the New Testament as well as other historical records of the time. I'm presently working towards my BA and will probably major in Religious Studies. First century Christianity did not last long in it's original form. No more than a century after Jesus died, you had various pockets of Christianity with different beliefs (ie. the Gnostics) and by the time the Catholic Church became the official religion, it had already changed dramatically from what the Messianic Jews (who of course were the forerunners of the first Christians), had practiced. In reality, Jesus never told his followers to start a new religion, he simply wanted to see changes made within Judaism itself. By todays standard, Jesus would be either a Reformed or Conservative Jew. He most certainly would not be a Catholic, Protestant or Jehovah's Witness.
-
BurnTheShips
First century Christianity did not last long in it's original form.
Second century Christianity did not last long in it's original form.
Fifth century Christianity did not last long in it's original form.
21st century Christianity will not last long in it's original form.
By todays standard, Jesus would be either a Reformed or Conservative Jew. He most certainly would not be a Catholic, Protestant or Jehovah's Witness.
Well then, to what do you atrribute Matthew 28:19, 20? Or John 3:16? Or basically the entire NT to? What kind of tradional Jew would teach such things? Obviously Jesus did not leave the religion fully formed, and if we take John 14:26 as having any weight at all, we would have to allow time and room for doctrinal development. As for Jesus looking like a Reformed or Conservative Jew, we must remember that Reformed and Conservative Judaism were greatly influenced by the dominant Christian cultural milieu in which they themselves developed!
BTS
-
undercover
Obviously Jesus did not leave the religion fully formed,
Maybe there's a reason for that...maybe Jesus (if he existed as the Bible portrays him) didn't mean for people to build a massive religion around him or build expensive, ornate buildings or force people to accept him as their savior at the end of a sword.
Maybe his message was one of love and peace (as Stephen Stills put it, Jesus was the first non-violent revolutionary) and he wanted people to find a way to happiness without the trappings of religious tradition and dogma.
-
BurnTheShips
Maybe there's a reason for that...maybe Jesus ( if he existed as the Bible portrays him) didn't mean for people to build a massive religion around him or build expensive, ornate buildings or force people to accept him as their savior at the end of a sword.
I think you don't get my point, if he existed as the NT portrays him, he left room for development after his leaving (John 14:12) under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit.
As for ornate buildings and such, we see Jesus treating the greatest, most ornate religious building in Judaism with a great deal of reverence and respect (John 2:13-17). We also see Jesus in the NT account frequently teaching in synagogues, which would have been among the most ornate buildings of the time in the area in which he lived.
Maybe his message was one of love and peace (as Stephen Stills put it, Jesus was the first non-violent revolutionary) and he wanted people to find a way to happiness without the trappings of religious tradition and dogma.
If that works for you run with it.
BTS
-
undercover
You failed to rationalize the part about forcing "people to accept Jesus as savior at the end of a sword" bit...