Active JW understands flaws in WTS doctrine but believes in the Bible

by flamegrilled 238 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  flamegrilled

  ShadesofGrey - do you mean Paul rather than Cornelius then? Can you just say who you are talking about and I'll respond? I already mentioned Paul in my earlier post.

  wobble - you say "not a clear scriptural grasp of what the kingdom is". I'm not convinced about that. I've asked people outside of JWs to explain the kingdom and it's so vague. I do believe that the Kingdom is God's government with Christ as king. I do believe that it is His means of reconciling all things to Himself as per his original purpose. I do believe there is scriptural support for this view.

  Again, JW's might not have everything right, but personally I think they do have a reasonable idea about what the kingdom is.

  You might have a really good and better explanation of the kingdom, and I would be happy to hear that, but generally speaking when I talk to Chrsitians about what God's kingdom is I don't come away feeling that they have a clear scriptural grasp either.

  Now someone's going to say that's because it doesn't measure up to WT doctrine. Maybe so. I'm open to that idea. I'll wipe the slate clean and compare two different ideas from scratch if that's what it takes.
• 

  AGuest

  It was not a "command", dear FG (peace to you!). If it were, it would have been to ALL... and not just "the Hebrews". Also, it would have directed ALL not to "forsake the gathering"... not just the Hebrews; however, apparently "SOME" had that "custom" (of NOT gathering). Who were the "some"? Non-christians? Why would the writer have even been concerned with what non-christians did in THEIR worship??

  I would also like to point out that Job, Moses, and Paul were not parts of an organization. Neither was Cornelius or the Ethiopian. Phillip led him to Christ in a very short time and then was whisked away. He didn't need more teaching.

  You are absolutely correct here, dear Shades (the greatest of love and peace to you!). Unfortunately, people tend to worship what they can SEE. So... they need to SEE that others think/believe "like" them. This is walking by sight... and not by FAITH (in the One who called them). It is that dependence on sight... and need for validation/verification by OTHERS as to our faith... that gets us into trouble. MANY called by God and Christ, however, spent a good deal of time alone. Certainly at the outset, often afterward. The thinking is that there is "strength in numbers." In this world, perhaps, yes. But with regard to things of the SPIRIT... it is by God's might, NOT our own... and not that of "numbers."

  Dear FG... ASK for holy spirit. Because without it, it really doesn't matter where you worship... or with whom: you're not yet in the Body, but OUTSIDE, so... it doesn't matter. You could join Islam and worship in a Buddhist temple - wouldn't matter. Even afterward... you could enter ANY building (without the intent to worship)... and God will be with you, through the indwelling of Christ IN you. YOU... would be the "temple" so that wherever YOU are, God IS. And if you want to ASK something of God... of an "important" nature, then you only need one more with you. It really is that simple.

  I hope this helps and, again, peace to you!

  A slave of Christ,

  SA
• 

  flamegrilled

  SA - but the implication of what you are suggesting is that what is written in each of Paul's letters is directed only to the specific recipients mentioned in each salutation. If his words to the Hebrews don't apply to the Romans or to us, then his letter to the Romans don't apply to the Corinthians or to us either. The final result of that logic is that nothing in any of his letter applies to us. That doesn't work for me.
• 

  flamegrilled

  Since a number of people have argued that the gathering in congregation meetings or any sort of group activity is not a requirement for Christians, let me ask a general question - what was the purpose of the first century congregation and the appointed elders? Maybe if I could understand your perspective on that the lightbulb would begin to shine. (I mentioned earlier that this was the bit of Franz's book that didn't gel with me, so I think it's an important piece of the puzzle)
• 

  tec

  But let's just take the command to "gather together"

  I was going to ask you 'who made this command", because I do not recall it as a command either. But I can see that Shelby and Shades have each answered as pertains to this.

  What if you had no one to gather together with? What if the only believers around were the ones who said that God was going to torture people in hell for eternity? Would you 'gather' with them because they are 'closest' to belief? Or continue to wander the wilderness with only Christ to guide and sustain you? Perhaps then He guides you to others for you to gather with. This place is also a gathering place, btw. For it is the spirit that counts, and there are many here.

  Peace,

  Tammy
• 

  ShadesofGrey

  Regarding how and when - it's clearly speculation built up on some adventist theories in the 19th century. IMO whether it's right or wrong doesn't change God's fundamental purpose to have Christ rule as king until all enemies are put under his feet and all things are reconciled to Him.

  The prophet Hananiah predicted that Israel would be set free in two years. (Jeremiah 28:1-4) Israel was indeed released, but not until years later. So Hananiah was simply off on the date. Was that okay? See Jeremiah 28:15 for the answer.
• 

  flamegrilled

  ShadesofGrey - Food for thought indeed. Was it just a problem with a mix up in dates? Not according to Jer 28:16. It seems to me that the big problem was that Jehovah had told the Israelites that they would have to serve Babylon for the full period, and Hananiah said they would not. In chapter 27 the Israelites were told to submit to the yoke of Babylon, and Hananiah said "be cool guys - everythings going to be okay without this submission business". It seems to me that what was at stake was a direct revolt against the command of God, not a slight temporal mix-up. I understand the parallel you are trying to draw. I just don't think the same principle is at stake. Hananiah downplayed the word of God. If anything WTS has kept the expectation of God's word cranked up a little too high too prematurely, but the ultimate message appears to be correct. And the premature enthusiasm may have indeed served a purpose. Here I am playing some advocacy to WTS teachings, but I fully acknowledge as already stated that it is not without error - I just can't class it as "revolt".
• 

  flamegrilled

  Tammy - I would do my best. But one could imagine extreme circumstances about anything. What if you were the guy James Franco played in 127 hours? Would you normally choose to go without food and water for several days? Would you choose to cut your arm off with a blunt knife? So I don't feel that imagining an extreme circumstance tells us much about what we "should" be doing as Chrsitians on a day to day basis when all the normal facets of life are available to us.
• 

  N.drew

  No! I did not say that Christ's brothers (and sisters) would not gather together. It is not a requirment.

  Think of what "forsakes" means for goodness sakes. It means leave forever. God. So if the witnesses had the scripture right it would mean that 2000* god damn times a year you would have to "forsake" the meeting, because each day there was a meeting you would decide not to go AGAIN. People!

  *That is high average, but not anymore as they have cut one meeting a week and I was counting at least one field service day a week. If you want to believe God means us to physically meet together, then please offer me a DIFFERENT scripture for that. Thank you. I'm angry.

  How then, if it doesn't mean meet physically together, do we "encourage" one another? The same way we can do good to Jesus's brother, even the least one.

  For instance lonely rules the world. OK for the rich and beautiful it doesn't but for the rest of us it does (most of the rest of us and good for you if you don't understnd what I'm saying about being lonely). When you meet a family on your travels and they have a baby, what do you do? You do goo goo eyes at the baby. BUT one who is "encouraging one another" will notice the siblings standing by for some attention. So be it! OK? Do I have to say more to get through the thick as a brick? That's not encouraging. I KNOW I KNOW. It's a pity really.
• 

  N.drew

  Right! Bad math. 200 times.