I have heard this JW argument before which explains away some of the scriptures alluding to everyone going to heaven but I was on JWfacts, 144,000 section and saw that belief no where in there.
Has anyone done any research to debunk that theory?
Bible written for the anointed....
by Momma-Tossed-Me 24 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
GOrwell
I hear this argument a lot. JW's claim that Christendom "pick's and chooses" what scriptures they want to follow, but with this practice, they do exactly the same thing. It's a genius way to having a scripture apply to any situation/class they want. I haven't done much research, but my general retort is that we should have two bible versions then, one for the anointed and one for the "other sheep," just so we're clear on what passages we really have to follow. Most of the NT wouldn't apply then.
At least the Mormon's got it right in this regard in that they came out up front with their own "inspired" revelation and other "inspired" writings, have their own modern-day prophets and stick by it, no matter the consequences.
-
tec
My study conductor told me that Christ was only talking to the anointed, yes.
-
sabastious
Their is a big assumption that goes within the JW community.
(A) The Bible agrees with itself on ALL Watchtower doctrine.
(B) Someone points out a scripture that, at face value, appears to disagree with Watchtower doctine
Since A is true then B must be false.
It's really as simple as that.
-Sab
-
-
Ding
The idea that the Bible was written to an exclusive group of 144,000 people is absurd on its face.
To add to that absurdity, the WTBTS announces that none of the "remnant" of this "anointed class" has any special insight into the Bible except the GB.
To add to that absurdity, when you point out all the erroneous, idiotic things the GB has published over the years, they use the "just humble, fallible men" defense.
To add to that absurdity, they are the only ones who understand "the deep things of God" and to disagree with them on anything is to rebel against Jehovah and risk annihilation.
-
Momma-Tossed-Me
Thanks, blondie that's what i was looking for.....
-
caliber
The shocker for most Jw's would be to find where this idea of Bible only being addressed to the anointed.... where it ultimately leads you
one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all."
1 Timothy 2:5,6"So in this strict Biblical sense Jesus is the
"mediator" only for anointed Christians."
Watchtower 1979 April 1 p.31"Likewise, the Greater Moses, Jesus Christ, is not the Mediator between Jehovah God and all mankind. He is the Mediator between his heavenly Father, Jehovah God, and the nation of spiritual Israel, which is limited to only 144,000 members." Worldwide Security Under the "Prince of Peace" pp. 10-11
If Jesus is only mediator for the few thousand remaining remnant on earth, who is mediator for the millions of Jehovah's Witnesses that do not form part of the 144,000?
-
GOrwell
Caliber : Again with the picking and choosing. By rights, Isaiah 43:10 ("you are my witnesses") applied only to Israel and the new Spiritual Israel, and thus ONLY the 144,000, but no, let's apply it everyone, just this time, and maybe a few others?
-
caliber
GOrwell .. consider this point related to that....... that most JW's are not aware of >>
I am ONE of Jehovah's Witnesses.
I've always thought this was interesting. The name "Jehovah's witnesses" (With a lower case 'w') was used by the religion as a descriptive term describing all true servants of God clear back to Abel. The first chapter of the 1959 book, Jehovah's Witnesses In The Divine Purpose describes this at length, claiming that Jehovah's witnesses are a "People with a most ancient history."
It wasn't proper to say, "I'm a Jehovah's Witness" as if this was the name of a religion; the correct use of the name was "I'm one of Jehovah's witnesses"
Jehovah's witnesses were not just another Christian sect .
Somewhere along the way though, they started capitalizing the 'W' and using the term, "Jehovah's Witnesses" as the formal name of an orgainzed religion. When an elder asks you the question, "Do you consider yourself to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses?" he is referring entirely to organizational affliation. (This distinction is never actually explained though)
Jehovah's Witnesses eventually became the very thing they claimed they were not (thoughts here by TD in a past thread )