Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?
by reniaa 407 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
isaacaustin
hmmm isaac I'm not sure I buy the 'we can do something without it being wrong as long as our intent is good' argument
That is the point of the commentaries you used to try to prove your point.
if that was the case Christmas wouldn't be becoming more a secular festival losing it's christian tag and people are coming to accept that, but also the principle that if you get so involved with festivals and marking the years that you get mired in everyday things to start putting God in a minor place in your life is also there from my thoughts on the scripture.
This is an unrelated point to the issue- Is the any sort of Scriptural objection? No there is not. The point that some may take away the Christian tag does not have a bearing here. Others observe with the intent of bringing praise to the Lord and preserving its Christan tag.
But do they lack superstition as well? why do all the rituals need observing, with certain feast days?
That is the point of Galatians- the observance of the day is a non-issue so long as the superstition is not the driving force.
no need to answer they were rhetorical questions. lol lets just agree to disagree you may have found some common ground from all the examples but my intent was only to show that many thought it pertained to specific feasts which i think I managed.
Yes, that is possible. But still doesn't show any sort of Scriptural objection. In fact, it agrees with the stance that the day is a nonissue- it is the outlook.
-
Doubting Bro
Especially in light of Romans 14:1-6 where Paul instructs Christians to not judge each other over the observance of such days. I don't have my WT Library with me right now, but I'm pretty sure their take on both Galatians and Romans is that Paul was referring to the Jewish holidays and those couldn't be objectionable since they were given by God. However, I concede that perhaps Galatians could be referring to other festivals. However, doesn't that cut against the JW argument that anyone who celebrates their birthday for example, should be removed from the congregation? I've studied the Bible a fair amount and I have never found a scripture that supports that stance. By the way, if the JWs are not 100% correct, then they don't have the truth. I haven't found any religion that I can honestly say is 100% in accordance with the Bible.
-
isaacaustin
LOL very good point DoubtingBro. I had forgotten that the WT insists that Romans 14 is talking specifically and only of the Jewish feasts. So Reniaa sounds like she is in direct disagreement with the WT in stating he was speaking of all celebrations. However, regardless of whether Paul is talking of Jewish customs or all customs the bottom line is that Paul shows choice. Observance or nonobservance is no issue and one should not be judged on either.
-
isaacaustin
Otwo
Those are great points anyone should consider. An active JW should be especially interested in these. Hey if their examination leads them to beleive the WT is correct then there beleifs will be reaffirmed and so much strong. Truth has nothing to fear.
-
reniaa
hi OTTO
Thats a sharp scarpel you want me to use but are you willing to use it on other major doctrines besides JW's could your add trinity/hellfire/saints to that list?
you added cross/stake and leolaia and I have argued that one through many pages and I still think that original wording is the winner everytime otherwise why even bother with the bible and lets not get onto the idolatry of the cross. (BTW let God strike me down but I use the same reasoning on tetragramation original wording will out, the doctrinal damage done by Lord in Old testament is far greater than any superstition and until a piece of NT is found earlier than what they currently have I think the NT position of his name the jury is still out).
The point is OTTO its easy to point a knife away from you in attack but to turn it towards yourself and stab yourself all over is much harder, I will and on some of the topics you mentioned your right JW's are weak in their positions but on some they are stronger are you willing to admit this too?
Reniaa
-
DaCheech
reniaa;
you are targeting all christians -vs- jws.
your reasoning says "jws must be right because otheres are wrong"......
well, wake up: others don't have to be wrong for the jw's to be right.
there is no right..... the bible contradicts iteself hundreds of times
-
OnTheWayOut
...and on some of the topics you mentioned your right JW's are weak in their positions but on some they are stronger are you willing to admit this too?
Well, here we get into personal application of the scriptures. "How do I see it?"
I can agree with you or disagree with you on the scriptures, but I really don't have a right
to ultimately say that my opinion is the only correct one and that others are wrong.My take on trinity/hellfire/saints;
Trinity is a confusing doctrine. The New Testament is designed to follow Jesus as the Christ.
It is the New Testament that is confusing people along with the established church for promoting
that as the only correct idea way back then.I think Jesus (the man) was saying that he is a son of God, just as anyone can be a son-of-God.
After his death, the following made him larger than life. He never claimed to be literally one with God.
The New Testament does not make that point clear, so who are we to judge others who see it
differently.Hellfire is out of Revelation and Jesus' own illustration of Lazarus (assuming the writers didn't make that
up) and is highly Greek in it's origins. The Bible does a poor job of describing an afterlife with it's various
contradictions. It's up to each person to examine that on their own. I say, "When you are dead, you are
dead." But I don't support the JW's hope for the dead anymore than I support Christianity's hope.Saints: I know that there is nothing in the Bible that says the church can decide who the "saints" are.
But the Bible does speak of "saints" (depending on the translation) and men must, out of curiousity, know
who they are. The JW's say they are the 144,000. They decide who that is, whether by pressure to
declare people not of that group, or by acknowledging those that claim they are of that group. The JW's
are no better than Christendom on that, except they don't pray to the 144,000. Well- even there, you could
find some references in the WT magazine that C.T.Russell is directing the work on earth now.I generally feel that JW's are moral people. No fault there. They just insist that they are right and others are
wrong. I cannot accept that. I generally feel that holidays are loaded with commercialism and come from
pagan roots. Everything is loaded with commercialism- especially the WT. Everything comes from pagan
roots- especially the WT.I can freely look at each issue, pointing that knife wherever I want to.
I don't claim to know all the answers to all issues in some absolute sense. I do know that WTS says they
have the truth. I do know that they say that something good like a glass of water becomes undrinkable with
even a drop of poison. I know that their "truth" is loaded with poisons. I don't really care if Jesus died on a
cross or a stake, I don't care why people want to come together in December and wish good will toward all
others, gambling is a personal choice as is cutting up a turkey in November. To each his own. But don't tell
me to avoid college and self-education through books that disagree with WTS. Don't tell me to shun my fellow
man. Don't put the organization's reputation ahead of the individual who has been molested by a JW uncle or
elder. Don't shun me for voting or joining the YMCA to use the pool, while the organization that tells you to
shun me was a member of the United Freaking Nations for nearly a decade. Don't lecture me on the evils of
aluminum and organ transplants and then say later, "It's a conscience choice." Don't tell a mother to shun
her own adult child because he thinks that the Bible doesn't say you cannot have a blood transfusion, but she
thinks WTS is right on the subject.Let the mother and adult child both decide on their own how to apply the information. If I clink glasses at my
party, and you wear a wedding ring, don't judge us.I know I wasted my time. As soon as you heard that I disagree with some established point from the Bible,
you jumped on that. The rest could have been BLAH BLAH BLAH. When you go back to the JW's, keep
all the answers here in mind. Keep researching. You will never be hopelessly all in the WTS doctrines after
you dared to speak to us. You will see why they said to avoid us. You will come back after wasting some
more time. I hope it's short. I look forward to lunching with you one day. -
isaacaustin
Thats a sharp scarpel you want me to use but are you willing to use it on other major doctrines besides JW's could your add trinity/hellfire/saints to that list?
you added cross/stake and leolaia and I have argued that one through many pages and I still think that original wording is the winner everytime otherwise why even bother with the bible and lets not get onto the idolatry of the cross. (BTW let God strike me down but I use the same reasoning on tetragramation original wording will out, the doctrinal damage done by Lord in Old testament is far greater than any superstition and until a piece of NT is found earlier than what they currently have I think the NT position of his name the jury is still out).
Reniaa
The WT insists that they, and only they, have the correct view on the above-mentioned points. Some are quite debatable while on others the WT is flat out wrong- such as the insertion of Jehovah into the NT. They use 2-edged reasoning by saying we can surely trust the Bible due to the fact that critical analysis has shown it to be accurate...yet in the same sentence claim that the the Divine name has been successfully stamped out of the NT until the coming of the NWT.
Regarding the other doctrines- even IF the WT was correct (let's say trinity/hellfire/soul) they are not the only groups holding their stance.
I can firther point out that the WT is the ONLY ones who are wrong about blood. So where does that leave them?
-
Mary
Thats a sharp scarpel you want me to use but are you willing to use it on other major doctrines besides JW's could your add trinity/hellfire/saints to that list?
Here is yet another attempt by Reniaa to try and deflect from the argument: Since she has no rational response to OTTO's post, she simply switches to the old faithful yelp by JW's: what about the trinity and hellfire?
We are not talking about the trinity OR hellfire Reniaa. We are discussing why it is okay for Jehovah's Witnesses to participate in some customs with a pagan background, but not others. You have yet to respond with anything that makes the slightest bit of sense, or where you're not talking in circles.
you added cross/stake and leolaia and I have argued that one through many pages and I still think that original wording is the winner everytime otherwise why even bother with the bible
Actually, it wasn't much of an argument. Leolaia kicked your ass since you had absolutely no way to refute what she said. Kinda like what you're doing on this thread.
and lets not get onto the idolatry of the cross.
Yes, let's not. Let's discuss why Jehovah's Witnesses can celebrate the anniversary of ones wedding, but not the anniversary of ones birth. Neither celebration is found anywhere in the bible, yet one is okay and the other one is forbidden. Why can Jehovah's Witnesses wear wedding rings which are of pagan origin, yet they can't celebrate Christmas?