The False Prophet Nathan? (page 9)

wasblind

" If she gave them something that God did not say, that would make her a falseprophet "

that's right BD, and we know there's a whole lot of stuff the WTS wrote that God didn't say.

If she gave them something that God did not say, that would make her a false prophet just as much as if she had predicted a future event that did not happen. Both scenarios would classify her as a false prophet.

It is also more difficult to verify.

In the first case you can say "God says to give me money" - maybe he did and maybe he didn't.

In the second "God said he'd blow up Paris next week" - Paris is ok seven days from now...false prophet.

Obviously JWs are guilty of the second. apologists like debator would like to focus on the OTHER forms of prophet, and whether or not the JWs have done things that qualify them as the bard-ish prophet. They make the argument about what the word means or could mean, rather than whether or not they ever made predictions which did not come true. Classic misdirection. It's always good to be aware of this tactic because they employ it on almost every point which they have no defense for, which is why you also cannot allow them to control the conversation, or your head will start spinning and frustration sets in.

brotherdan

So actually we can say that the WT was guilty of false prophecy in 2 ways.

1. They predicted future events that didn't come true (all be it from their twisting of the scriptures)

2. They spoke in God's name words that God did not say.

You know, Debator, if they were guilty of false prophecy and afterwards wrote a statement like, "We have published some statements in earlier issues of the Watchtower that indicated that events would happen in the future, and those events did not occur. We would like to issue an apology to anyone that this may have affected in a negative way. These were not the words of Jehovah, and thus we apologize for our personal error." If they said something like this, I'd have the utmost respect for them. But instead they minimize. They downplay. They do EXACTLY what you are doing in this post. They shift the blame on others by saying that THEY were the ones that had improper expectations.

And speaking of shifting the blame...this is how they are guilty of something else. They blame the anointed prophets of Jehovah and accuse them of doing the same false prophecying that they do. These prophets spoke by means of Holy Spirit. So by calling them "false prophets" they are in fact blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, which is an unforgivable sin.

brotherdan

Superpunk, we can prove that they are guilty of the 2nd example of false prophecy when they change the policy. If they say that God is using the Watchtower to teach and it teaches something that is later changed, then that is something that God did not teach.

So we CAN verify that they Watchtower has done this.

superpunk

Well the light IS getting brighter.

Cold Steel

Actually, I believe Jonah was a metaphor. Why? Because Nivevah wasn't an Israelite city, and God didn't usually send prophets to Gentile cities. Second, Ninevah repented in short order -- within days. Why is that an issue? Because it was a huge, huge city. And it was a Phonecian city where prostitution business loomed because of the sailors which were going in and out. So to think that Ninevah was going to repent straight away was a little too much to hope for.

But didn't Jesus refer to Jonah? Yes, but we refer to Aesops' fables all the time without believing them.

Samson, too, might have been a metapor. Why? Because the angel said to his parents that he would "deliver" Israel, and Samson did not deliver Israel. Second, the man was dumb as a brick! Thirdly, even in his youth he had taken up with Philistine women and was fornicating with them -- hardly a something an Israelite youth would have done. Finally, he murdered innocent Phillistines just to get their cloaks (to pay off a bet), and he resorted to cruelty to animals, setting foxes' tails afire. It didn't even work. As for his lack of intelligence was concerned wouuld, would you have fallen for all of all of those trickes....

debator

Hi Brotherdan

The shepherds have the automony to make decisions for the whole that is biblical

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.

and those decisions don't have to be inspired they simply have to be Bible directed because the Bible is inspired.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (New International Version)

16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

You are confusing having authority with being inspired they are not the sme thing.

The creteria for inspiration had to be put down so people knew which books of the bible where inspired from among other writings etc used in that time.

If someone says "God told me that Armageddon happens on August the 15th at 2pm" that would be claiming inspiration.

If someone told me "Based on the inspired prophecy in the Bible and the chronology from the Bible I see it pointing to august as the time of the end" that would not be claiming to do prophecy.

The difference is simple one person claims to have conversations with God the other does not they use his bible. I find it hard the people on here cannot see the simple truth of this?

Witnesses have never claimed to have direct conversations with God any promises, or prophecies, or Chronology they refer to is from the bible only and can be openly seen to be from the bible. "this generation won't pass away"? Jesus's words from the Bible. God's promise of a peaceful earth? from the bible psalms and isaiah. "Times time and half"? from the bible revelation and daniel. "a year for a day"? from the Bible. Armageddon? from the Bible. And the list goes on.

The Bible give many examples of people called prophets that did not prophecy. There is no mention of them prophecying or saying words from God. No circumstances even pointing to it and in Miriam case she made mistakes and got leprosy. So your opinion is Just that saying "that lack of Biblical backing doesn't matter" your opinion is more important.

If people prefer to believe your opinion that Prophets have to prophecy without Bible backing for your opinion because the Bible clearly shows examples of prophets that have no inspired prophecies to their name which backs my point, that is their choice.

This doesn't take away from the fact that the Bible makes clear statements on what makes someone a false prophet and it isn't calling themself prophets, it is claiming to be able to say the very words directly from Jehovah himself and witnesses have never done this. If you want to make your own "goal posts" or creteria for what constitutes a false prophet and stick it on witnesses then you are only fooling yourself.

debator

Hi Jwoods

Yours and Dans opinion that ALL prophets must prophecy is a non-sequitur because the Bible clearly gives us examples of prophets that didn't prophecy. They did other things in support of God but no inspired words where recorded against them. Your logic is to say well just because it isn't there doesn't mean it didn't happen but since there is no evidence to back your sweeping conclusion for this position, it is a weak position to argue from.

debator

Hi superpunk and snowbird

Thank you for confirming the point of all prophets not prophesying.

My defence of the witnesses purely from deut 18 (All of it not just a few proof text scriptures) show it is inspired words directly from Jehovah himself is what we are talking about being claimed here. Witnesses have never claimed to be inspired.

Superpunk they have drawn understandings from Bible chronology and signs for us to be ready and "on watch" this is not the same as claiming to be inspired. They are claiming their understandings from God's Bible not directly from God which is the full creteria in deut 18 put down for anyone to read for themselvea.

Deuteronomy 18:18 (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.

This is the context for all the scriptures that follow. The false prophets claim to speak words directly from God himself.

Using the Bible for understanding is a Command there is no sin in this, even if you get it wrong the bible itself can correct you.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (New International Version)

16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

debator

Hi bennyk

This is already covered calling yourself a prophet isn't the issue. The creteria as set out by all of deut 18 is to claim to speak words directly from God to say you are inspired literally. It is not something people can put on you or can read into badly worded uininspired wt's. The person has to be claiming they can speak/communicate with/talk with/get visions from God himself. Witnesses have never claimed this but trying to build this from wt's trying to read it into them is just being dishonest.

Any witness can tell we know none of us have been inspired because that stopped with the apostles This is an across the board understanding all our people know.

The False Prophet Nathan?

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (New International Version)

Share this