Generation - topic dedicated to debator

by teel 77 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  debator

  HI TD

  Your response is obviously your opinion and I respect that. The bible makes it clear the spirit has many uses and yes one of them is the Bible itself. But It does allow for inspired words directly from God and guidance through spirit to be two different things. The one is a direct communication taken by a few direct forms spoken from Jehovah himself and the other is indirect more subtle guidance.

  You say.

  Of couse one can claim that Jehovah's Witnesses have a knowledge of the Bible superior to any other church or group and if someone, after studying the Bible comes to that conclusion, I can respect that.

  And yes this is my opinion of them but I also see this as a sign of the "guidance" at work. You say any Christian group can claim it? This is patently true, in fact they all do claim it but do they show the fruitage of it? I only see the fruitage in the witnesses in a real way literally by how biblically honest they are.

  They all do have access to the bible at least but then they choose to ignore it. The bible tells us that most of the major spirit gifts ended with the apostles including inspiration. History proves this to be true. But we have the bible and this "guidence" and People can listen to them or not.

  Jesus's parable of the two sons works well for me on this. It's easy to say "yes" but in reality actually do the opposite "no" in action. All these Christian groups have the bible as indeed the Jews had the hebrew scriptures but does it mean they will follow it's spirit guidance? They all seek God in prayer but if they are praying to a false God will they get guidance? They can beg for guidance but if they ignore the first steps of the bible itself how can they gain more?

  Hi isaac

  I'm sorry I don't start threads, I don't have the time to do them real justice.
• 

  TD

  Debator,

  You've drawn an interesting distinction between "....inspired words directly from God and guidance through spirit..."

  The theological concept of, "Inspiration" is defined in broad enough terms to include both. A typical definition is, "Divine guidance or influence exerted directly on the mind and soul of humankind."

  Inspired words directly from God, would be plenary inspiration. Few in the Bible ever experienced anything like this and the Bible contains writings which if inspired, would be simply the result of "Guidance through spirit" as the writers make no pretense of any other inspiration at all.

  Semantic equivalence is not just a matter of opinion and in this case, can easily be put to the test with a simple exercise:

  Start with God and work your way down to man. Try to explain the transfer of information, thoughts, ideas, etc. substantial enough to formulate authoritative doctrine without satisfying the definition of "Inspiration."

  A claim to be "Guided" or "Directed" by God, in any meaningful way (i.e. Something more than vague feelings) without actually being "Inspired" is therefore a suprisingly difficult proposition and demands a viable explanation of how this may occur.
• 

  sabastious

  Probably one of the most headache inducing threads I have ever skimmed.

  -Sab
• 

  sabastious

  Mincing words is mincing words.

  Creating a logical difference between "inspired" and "spirit directed guidance" is a blatent form of pretzel logic.

  -Sab
• 

  isaacaustin

  No problem Debator...I have been out of this since last week (baby born)...I will jump back in at some point in time, but for now am just relaxing.
• 

  isaacaustin

  Debator said:

  I am sorry for the delay.

  Hi Isaac

  You cannot put the accusation of inspiration on a group. They have to claim it for themselves. As deut 18:18 points out they have to say they are speaking the actual inspired words of God themselves. You cannot say "They put that badly so I am going to accuse them of claiming inspiration from God by it". Thats not how being a false prophet works biblically.

  The scriptures on Hananiah say he directly claimed to say the inspired words of God himself against Jeremiah. There is no comparison between him and witnesses accept the one you fabricated. The witnesses have always denied openly that they have any inspiration from God.

  Jeremiah 28:10-11 (New International Version)

  10 Then the prophet Hananiah took the yoke off the neck of the prophet Jeremiah and broke it, 11 and he said before all the people, "This is what the LORD says: 'In the same way will I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon off the neck of all the nations within two years.' " At this, the prophet Jeremiah went on his way.

  I must say while I find you points interesting Isaac but I do not agree with them.

  My reply:

  What we are coming down to is basically this...we both agree Hananiah said his words were the words of God. You disagree that the WT called their proclamation on the 1914 generation God's words. I really do not know how much clearer it can be that they did make that claim in calling it 'the Creator's promise...' Calling something 'the Creator's promise' means that God spoke it. It seems like that is our point of disagreement...and we have both probably brought out our whole arsenal of ways to bring out our stance.
• 

  debator

  Sorry for the delay I've had a busy week.

  Hi TD.

  All I'm trying to show is the bible allows for people to be directly contacted by God literally "Spoken too by Jehovah" and it is falsely claiming this in deut 18 which is what constitutes as being a false prophet Biblcally. Spirit guidance which doesn't involve this is I agree far ranging and indeed hard to pin down.

  But since you recognise the BIble can set the parameters for different uses of holy spirit usage then you must also recognise the bible deliberately points out which specific individual spirit uses that are claimed falsely are then what constitutes false prophecy. The bible differentiates so we should too.

  Hi Isaac

  Since they were refering to the already inspired "Creator's promise" from the bible in Isaiah/psalms (already written prophecy) in this awake introduction then they are not claiming inspiration. Your response to this is the second part which they have decerned from bible chronology is not part of this and so they are claiming inspiration but if you recognise this second section is not part of the promise which they are refering to you have shot yourself in the foot and separated the "Creators promise of a peaceful earth" from the second part yourself.

  Hi Seb

  Since the bible itself allows for different uses of Holy spirit differentiating in particular the difference between falsely claiming the ability to prophecy, to speak "WORDS FROM GOD" himself (And it is this that is condemned in particular) and other less direct ways.

  The minute Deut 18 specified the particular part of claiming holy spirit falsely as speaking the words of God himself as wrong then that is the dividing line.

  It's like saying everyone that takes something from a shop are criminals without specifying it is the ones that are taking without paying that are criminals. The bible itself sets the parameters of wrongdoing on spirit usage, which people on here recognise because they easily pick out the time parametre but ignore the "speaking words of God parametre"
• 

  debator

  Hi everyone

  Just to add the accusation was brought up on this debate that Jehovah's witnesses gone against the SPECIFIC points in deut 18 as to what constitutes a false prophet.

  Deut 18 defines what is inspired and what is false prophecy. Biblically it was easily shown that Jehovah's witnesses have not done this according to the parameters specifically set by deut 18.

  Some on here have tried to redefine Godly inspiration by their own ideas on it but if we are using deut 18 specifically to accuse we should also use it specifically to acertain if what is accused is correct.

  I think it has been adequately proved that according to deut 18:18-22 Witnesses are not false prophets

  Deuteronomy 18:18-22 (New International Version)

  18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will PUT MY WORDS in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. 20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

  21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

  If you would like to lay further biblical points on the table, I will happily address them but I think the case of not being false prophets has been adequately proved for the witnesses.
• 

  TD

  Debator

  I completely understand the position you explain above and would add that I've never, ever accused the JW's of being false prophets in the deuteronomical sense.

  In an age where God is not actively communicating with anybody, I would question whether Deut 13 has any applicability at all.

  By the same token though, in an age where God is not actively communicating with anybody, I would question the legitimacy of any church or group defending their authority structure by referring back to prior systems where miracles, revelation, prophecy, speech of knowledge and other forms of active guidance were the order of the day.

  A church cannot have it both ways. They cannot wield authority commensurate with 1st century Apostolic authority and disavow active guidance from God.
• 

  debator

  Hi TD

  Please excuse I had not noticed your reply. thank you for understanding my point of view.

  Jehovah's witness certainly don't have the inspired apostolic authority since those specific gifts of the spirit have ended but Paul and the other apostles under spirit clearly sets up an organised authoritive structure we should follow till Armageddon. We have clear concise instructions on this.

  1 Timothy 3:1-3 (New International Version)

  1 Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, [a] he desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.

  Hebrews 13:17
  Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.

  1 Timothy 5:17
  The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching.

  This is extremely clear instructions that we will have an authoritive structure but also we know it is one lacking Inspiration at this time but that makes it no less one that we should not follow as instructed. It is simply a practical measure used throughout the Bible for God's people. At no point are we meant to wander around as flockless sheep without shepherds of men among us that we give leadership dues too.

  1 Peter 5:2
  Be shepherds of God's flock that is under your care, serving as overseers—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve;