Frustrated with JW Bible study!

by ElizabethTravers 31 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  ElizabethTravers

  Hi all,

  I am new 2 this forum.

  I have been meeting up with 2 JW ladies on a weekly basis. It has all been "polite". Today we covered a bit of the Trinity.

  I had read Rhodes book on Reasoning from the Scriptures with JW's, but I found almost ALL my arguments that I used, in terms of every Bible verse we went through (or I attempted to go through with them) went pear shape! 4 example...I was trying to show them all the same qualities-characteristics that Jesus has that God has...this didn't matter to their theology as God apparently gave Jesus these qualities to use as His witness. I then spoke to them about verses about Jesus being saviour (that didn't matter either as again it is not "literal" interpretation from the Bible BUT rather it is the bigger picture...God through Jesus etc...and that is what "our" Bibles actually mean. I then looked at John the Baptist's foretelling of Jesus, which they swap the Isaiah quote in NT as using the word 'Jehovah' instead of Lord...because the verse implies that Jesus is something more than what they think...

  I spoke with them about Michael and Jesus supposedly being him...I used all the verses...but they said it didn't matter as Jesus was GREATER than the other angels...so I spoke about the change in natures, when the Bible says Jesus is immutable - No, this didn't matter as God "is so great" He can do whatever He needed to do and if this meant changing the nature of Michael then that is what happened.

  They also told me that I could pull all the verses I wanted and that I needed to realise that "I am pulling verses out of context" & that they are fewer than the ones that are pro their ideas and that I was basically wasting my time...

  I am frustrated!! I am annoyed that every single verse I used from the book did not help! They appear to be bullet proof.

  Is there any hope this situation in terms of evangelism>

  Blessings
• 

  leavingwt

  Welcome!

  What is your goal?
• 

  ElizabethTravers

  Hi, thanks.

  I am a Christian & My goal is to show them that the Watchtower Teachings are twisted and misleading from the real Truth, that Jesus is God. And with that realisation I hope that they can come to know Jesus as their personal Lord and Saviour (& God) & be saved from their deception.

  Warmest wishes
• 

  TheSilence

  Unless they are ready to see that their teachings are twisted and misleading they will not see it. I learned a long time ago that some walls are pointless to bang your head against. And if they are ready they will find out for themselves.

  Jackie
• 

  garyneal

  Elizabeth,

  Ask them to explain John 20:28, 'Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"' I would be real interested in what their response is.

  You see, in the Greek the text is definitive and is totally unanswerable. This is because the word theos is preceded by the definite article ho where Thomas says THE GOD OF ME to Jesus. The literal translation is, "The Lord of me and the God of me."

  This is important because the lack of the definite article (ho) in John 1:1 is the very reason witnesses use to explain why they translated it to say, "... and the Word was a god." They claim that when theos is not preceded by the article ho then it does not reference Jehovah God. However, in John 20:28 ho theos is clearly present.

  To explain this, they may respond with:

  • Well Thomas was astonished and he was saying something along the lines of "Oh My God!" because of the way Jesus appeared to him.

  So you mean to tell me that Thomas was blaspheming God in the presence of Jesus?

  • Thomas was acknowledging Jesus' presence when he said "My Lord" and Jehovah's presence when he said "My God."

  Um, yeah and how can you honestly infer that from the text?

  • Well, Satan is a god isn't he?

  This misses the point of their arguing their translation of John 1:1. In John 20:28 Thomas does not call Jesus A GOD, he calls Him THE GOD and according to Watchtower reasoning (concerning John 1:1) if the definite article appears in the text, it refers to Jehovah God. Therefore, using their reasoning, Thomas is calling Jesus Jehovah God.

  Simply put, there is no way out and I cornered an elder that my wife knew since she was a little girl on this. He tried to wiggle his way out by saying that it is not really blaspheming God but insisted on the fact that it must be astonishment because of the exclamation mark in the verse. Nevermind the fact that the Greek text has no punctuation.
• 

  TheSilence

  To illustrate why I feel that way:

  When my sister was 16 she was living with my dad, both witnesses. He had been disfellowshipped and could not seem to get back in good graces. One night she calls me and says that dad is threatening to commit suicide. I come over and with the help of my uncles signed him into the hospital against his will. I took my sister to my mom's house.

  This situation was the last straw for my mom, it cemented in her mind that this was a cult, and she had gotten 3 of her kids out and she wasn't going to lose my sister to it. So, she put her foot down, my sister would not be allowed to attend meetings or any other witness activities while she was living there. She told my sister this while they were both in the car the next day driving somewhere. My sister got hysterical and threatened to run away. She would move from witness house to witness house and my mom would never find her if she tried to keep her away from Jehovah. My mom had other kids at home and to this day she will tell you that is the only reason she didn't just leave town with my sister in the car at that exact moment. They came to an agreement: my sister could attend meetings if she would agree to see a counselor or therapist.

  So, my mom makes an appointment and takes my sister to a therapist. My mom speaks with the lady first and tells her that my sister is a Jehovah's Witness and it's a cult and went on about different things. The therapist said she had never heard anything like that about the witnesses and that she was sure my mom was over-reacting, but she would speak with my sister. (My mom does tend to get emotional so she probably seemed a bit irrational, to the therapist's credit.)

  My sister goes in and has her session with the therapist and then the therapist wants to speak with my mom again. First words out of her mouth, "You are absolutely right, your daughter is in a cult and she is brainwashed." Her advice: Never speak against it, never do anything to try to pull her away from it, because if my mom did that before my sister was ready to leave on her own she would only lose her. The best thing my mom could do was maintain a relationship with her as best she could so that if my sister ever decided she wanted out she had a life line to the real world.

  And, so, that's the advice I follow with indoctrinated people. I try not to judge, I try to accept. I try to be a friend, sister, aunt, whatever my relationship is to them, the best that I can so that if they ever want out they have someone to grab on to. You are not going to convince them unless they want to be convinced.

  My two cents, and worth exactly that ;)

  Jackie
• 

  garyneal

  Elizabeth,

  If you are attempting to witness to Jehovah's Witnesses, keep in mind that as far as they are concerned they know the Bible better than you. Furthermore, if you attempt to reason with them using the Bible alone, they will view you as 'leaning on your own understanding' as they believe that the Bible cannot be understood without a teacher. To them, this teacher is the 'faithful and discreet slave' Jesus spoke of in Matthew 24:45. They believe this 'faithful and discreet slave' is the governing body of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

  The best way to witness to a witness is to question their theology and ask why they teach what they do. This should get you started.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=949n_xH9nso

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ma_iVbSIbg

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnqQ2taQGio

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T0U6fWSY5Q

  Also, check out http://www.freeminds.org/ and http://www.4jehovah.org/.
• 

  diamondiiz

  Hello and welcome;

  Well trinity is an opinion and it's a weak theory to try to prove. Personally I don't buy into it either. If you want something to get witnesses confused go for the 607BC date as a destruction for Jerusalem. If you prove them wrong on 607 you should easily show that 1914 isn't a date for Christ's return and therefore 1919 is not the date for Christ appointing faithful and descrete slave thus making the jw leaders a fraud and a bunch of liars.

  You can ask them something like

  "I've read somewheres that you taught that Christ was to return invisibly in 1914 some 40 years prior to that date. Is that true?"

  Depending on the dubs they will probably respond "yes" and tell you that it is true. They may show you some articles where it says that wts taught that 1914 would mark the end of the gentile time some 40 years prior. Ask if by preaching end of the gentile times they also mean return of Christ? If they don't show you anything to do with gentile times then ignore gentile times and go directly to how they arrived at 1914 which the basis for will be 607BC and argue from there. If they do show you gentile times article(s) then ask them why they taught Christ returned in 1874 until 1930s? You can stay on this very topic for a while since most witnesses don't know the 1874 teaching of Christ's return. For reference you can use Thy Kingdom Come book which was written by Charles Russell and here is a pdf link:

  http://www.a2z.org/wtarchive/docs/1890_Thy_Kingdom_Come_1911_edition.pdf

  And then ask them to show you how they arrived at 1914 which as stated above will lead you to 607BC as destruction of Jerusalem by Babylonians which can be shown to be wrong through chronology of kings that wts agrees with and you can use this thread for some good discussion:

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/55372/1/586-587-the-K-I-S-S-approach-no-VAT4956-Ptolemy-Josephus-needed

  and if you do some research on archeological, astronomical and other historical evidence pointing to the 586/587BC date for destruction of Jerusalem you should get these witnesses either re-thinking their belief in 1914 or they will leave you alone. Be prepared and don't change topic until you argue it out.

  They cannot prove 607BC outiside their own reasoning which doesn't have much legs to stand on. If you can get Gentile Times Reconsidered book by Carl Olof Jonsson it's worth every penny for anyone studying with witnesses or anyone having any dealings, past or present with witnesses. Their reasoning is flawed in a huge way since they use historical evidence for 539BC as a destruction of Babylon by Cyrus and the same chronology they ignore which points to 586/7 and not 607BC.

  They may say that they don't serve for dates and it doesn't matter if 1914 is wrong then that's where you have to point out that if 1914 is wrong then the faithful slave wasn't chosen in 1919 and their leaders are liars and are not chosen by Jesus.

  This may take you a bit to research but since you're already putting time into "studying" with witnesses you don't have that much to lose and you'll learn a lot about the wts corner stone teaching that makes wts the apocalyptic cult that they are. If you cannot find Gentile Times Reconsidered in local stores you can check here, it will not only give you some good knowledge about wts magic dates but about the history of religious movements seeking the end date.

  http://www.commentarypress.com/Publication/English.html

  Arguing trinity, immortal soul or hell fire will not get you anywheres IMO

  good luck
• 

  ElizabethTravers

  You guys are all awesome!!

  Wish I had come to this website earlier.

  Thank you greatly!
• 

  garyneal

  Arguing trinity, immortal soul or hell fire will not get you anywheres IMO

  I tend to agree with this statement as I no longer try to argue the trinity myself because in some cases it can be taken either way. The deity of Jesus Christ, however, is something that I believe the Bible clearly teaches (provided of course you are not reasoning from their Bible).

  That said, since most witnesses believe in their minds that they know the Bible better than you, arguing using the Bible is practically pointless in most cases. The 607 vs 587 BCE is a good place for any witness who is really trying to seek truth. Unfortunately, some will use the Insight and Kingdom come books as their final authority on the subject. This in spite of the fact that the encyclopedias in the libraries use 587 BCE for the destruction of Jerusalem.

  So here's a good scenario to reason on based on this teaching.

  I understand that many Christians believe that Christmas Day is not Jesus' birthday. However, I can go to any library and pick up and encyclopedia and look up Christmas and confirm what you teach about Christmas. About is being a pagan holiday and that no one really knows what day Christ was born on, etc.. Any reasonable person would have to conclude that Christmas is not Christ's birthday and if anyone insists that it is, that person is not being reasonable and is just blinding himself or herself to the facts.

  I am curious, the Watchtower Society teaches that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE by the Babylons. Yet, if you were to go to the library and research it there, you would find that 587 BCE tends to be the favored date. Wouldn't a reasonable person conclude that 607 BCE could in fact be wrong based on this? Also, since the Watchtower Society insists on 607 BCE in spite of all of the evidence favoring 587 BCE, doesn't this make the society appear to be unreasonable, blinding itself and its members to the facts?

  Simply put, ask a Jehovah's Witness to prove 607 BCE using sources other than Watchtower publications.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrCleOXkYu0