Generation change & Michael/Jesus - wife's bible study

by insearchoftruth 27 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Slappy

  Lol, you know what this brings to mind? That Southpark episode about Mormons. ;-p

  You're dead on about bible hopscotch btw. A person can say and prove whatever they want when only taking things verse by verse. Why do you think there are so many different forms of "Christianity" in the world today, or atheists think they have such a strong argument when saying that the Bible contradicts itself? You could always play bible hopscotch back and show that "Abraham tied his ass to a tree and walked fifty furlongs." That might be too aggressive though, even if it is entertaining.

  There is one question I never got to ask my JW hounders b4 they decided I was of the devil and they gave me up for dead. That being that JWs clarify or change their beliefs on the basis that they have been revealed more of the truth, or new truths. But if God is "the same yesterday, today, and forever" and the JWs are a direct representative of Him, and we are told to be like Him ("Be Holy as I am Holy" and "Be perfect even as your Father in Heaven is perfect"), then shouldn't the JWs also be unchanging?

  Anyway, it's clear that you have the "...wise as a serpent..." part down, so I pray that God gives you the insight and wisdom to turn your wife before true damage is done. Although I truly hope you don't have the "...harmless as doves..." part down...at least from the JW perspective. ;-p

  Remember, "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are called according to His purpose." Rom 8:28
• 

  uninformed

  I asked about the generation change and she referred to Matthew 24:34 to show why the change was made to be anointed only, since at that time Jesus was speaking to the disciples, I also asked about the changing of the calling of the anointed, I was amazed she was not aware of the change?!?!? And her husband is a PO????

  Now you are onto their trick.

  THEY KNOW that very few are paying attention. They make changes and a few years later no one remembers that it was a change.

  Pretty soon, even 1914 will go away.

  They don't want BIBLE STUDENTS in their org, they want people who accept whatever they say, whenever they say it.

  They regularly change a 50 year old doctrinal teaching with one unexplained sentence in the WT.

  Stop your study and beat the hell out of them, take a broom to them and get them out of your house.

  (little humor there)

  brant
• 

  possible-san

  Hi! insearchoftruth,

  Thanks all,

  First, there is a thing which I would like to tell to you.
  This is an important matter when you discuss.
  
  It is better to call not "all" but a name, when you say appreciation.
  
  You have done so in other threads.
  For example, ...
  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/164270/1.ashx

  By the expression "Thanks all", you must not expect a reply.
• 

  insearchoftruth

  Appreciate it Possible San!! I can see what you mean, that could sure stop the thread, couldn't it!!!
• 

  insearchoftruth

  Thanks Mary,

  What would be the canned JW comebacks for the scriptures on Jesus/Michael that you note?

  Eric
• 

  TheListener

  insearchof,

  The JW canned response will come from the Reasoning book. If you have it good. If not get it.

  They don't come up with answers for every argument. They don't need to - they're right regardless of what you argue. They just rely on being right no matter what you say.

  It's unfortunate but there it is.

  The most they can do is use the CDrom and/or read the Insight and Reasoning book - which all pretty much use the same arguments.
• 

  Mary

  What would be the canned JW comebacks for the scriptures on Jesus/Michael that you note?

  One or all of the following:

  1. A glazed looked followed by a look of panic as their brain cells kick into gear
  2. They might say that no other archangels mentioned in the scriptures by name. While that is true in itself, that is still no reason to conclude that Michael is Jesus. It is generally conceded by biblical scholars that Gabriel is also an archangel, though of lesser status than Michael. In the Book of Enoch chapter 53:6 it actually says that there are 7 archangels: Michael, Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel. While the Book of Enoch did not make it into the canon, it is still generally accepted as being "inspired".
  3. They will probably emphasize the scripture in Daniel 12:1 that says that Michael will stand up 'in behalf of the sons of your people". I would answer that just because someone (or in this case, an archangel) "stands up for" the people is no reason to conclude that this must be referring to Jesus.

  The best way I can think of describing it is as follows:

  Let's take a look at those in charge of D-Day. British General Bernard Montgomery and American General Dwight Eisenhower, spearheaded the invasion at Normandy. After landing, the beachhead would have a continuous build-up of troops and equipment. First Canadian Army, for example, would see 3rd Infantry Division, under the command of Major General R.F.L. Keller, and 2nd Armoured (tank) Brigade land at Juno Beach on D-Day. 2nd Infantry Division and the rest of General Guy Simmonds' II Canadian Corps would be in place by mid-July.

  There are four Generals mentioned here. Should we assume that because of their rank and title that they're all the same person? Of course not. And just because Michael is said to be "standing up" for the people, it can in no way be asserted that he must be Jesus. That sort of logic is just stupid.

  After that, they'll probably try switching gears to another topic. DON'T LET THEM. This is a typical tactic of the Witnesses (I'm sure we all did it at one time or another). They switch from one topic to another so that you go round and round and nothing ever gets settled. Make them stay on topic.
• 

  insearchoftruth

  And to follow on Mary's comment, it is because of help like this I am going to miss it as well!!!
• 

  blondie

  Actually, it was researching this WTS doctine that started me on the way out. I realized that it wasn't scripturally supported and that the WTS was trying to pull a rabbit out of the hat.
• 

  possible-san

  Hi! Mr. insearchoftruth,

  My biggest refuting point is the first chapter of Hebrews where Jesus is compared as so much better than an angel.....any other suggestions?

  I do not know whether this information is help you.
  But I introduce an article in the Watchtower magazine of the early days.

  Archangel Michael was explained as follows.

  ‘“Let all the angels of God worship him’; (that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God)”
  
  The Watchtower Reprints, November 11, 1879, p. 48
  http://www.mostholyfaith.com/bible/reprints/Z1879NOV.asp#R48

  The picture of the article was put on my bulletin board.
  http://xbbs.knacks.biz/possible01#a743