Active JW understands flaws in WTS doctrine but believes in the Bible (page 6)

wasblind

" wasblind - Yes. We should be witnesses of Jesus. I note that WTS must have noted this valid criticism, as there was a WT study to encourage this a few months back. But I agree with your point. The message isn't always quite right. "

Thank you so much FG, for your response

do you think you could send me a link to the specific WT article ??

If you don't mind, could you follow me in the reasoning book ?

On PAGE 208 under the chapter " Jehovah' Witnesses "

the subheading reads " Christians are supposed to be wtinesses for Jesus not Jehovah "

within' that preceding paragraph it introduces a " new thought "

that lead me to think about Galatians 1:8-12 , in these scriptures it say not to go beyond

the things that are taught because they are not things from man

On page 203 in the reasoning book it states the name Jehovah's Witness's was adopted in 1931

more detail about the name change is in the Kingdom proclaimers book, and states the name

goes along with the work they do. Rutherford was responsible for the name change

Because they are witnesses of Jehovah not for Jesus

On page 190 in the reasoning book it states the beliefs that set jehovah's witnesses apart from other religions

(2) .....Anyone who publicly witnesses about Jehovah

Does the article mention Acts 1:8 ? how would they explain it

punkofnice

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Flaaaaaamegriiiilllllllled!

I get where you are coming from. As far as 'proof' of JW snitches in the Nazi camps and shares (Which is a whole thread on it's own), rather than surrendering all I have I'll give you clues for your independant research (All of which have been covered on this forum)

1 - Erich Frost 2 - RandCorp/RandCam (you might also want to look at gambling with hedge funds).

Happy hunting.

Regards Paolo.

flamegrilled

Paolo - thanks. Will search on those.

wasblind - I think that article was within last 12 months and I don't have new CD yet. The angle of the article as far as I recall was addressing the fact that Paul prached the "good news about Christ Jesus" rather than the emphasis being "good news of the kingdom". It was basically showing how we preach Jesus in imitation of that, because there is no foundatation without him. They may not have used the phrase "witnesses of Jesus", but that was the basic tone of the article.

wasblind

FG you ask this in your OP

" As an active JW who understands the flaws in WTS doctrine, but believes in the Bible, how do I identify a form of worship that meets all the criterea:"

I don't think you will see any one religion meet all criteria

On page 323 in the reasoning book it give and example of

a glass of water with one drop of poison

Do you consider the flaws that are taught in this religion to

be liken to drops of poison ???

The WTS consider the trinity being one of the flaws of the churches

they consider this a drop of poison because it is a wrong teaching

would you consider things they no longer teach to be true, drops of poison ???

wasblind

One more question, then I will stop buggin' you :)

Even if they change a misguided teaching, because of the fact

that they claim to be guided by holy spirit, are they sayin'

the holy spirit was wrong ???? Or were they wrong because

it wasn't by holy spirit they were guided

It is taught that everything from God is good, perfect. The apostles were

proof of this, they were imperfect humans who were guided by holy spirit

the bible does not show where they taught anything wrong

wasblind

Thank you for puttin' up with me FG :)

flamegrilled

wasblind - I don't go with the drop of poison illustration. It's been a long time since I thought JWs have a monopoly on truth. We don't and nobody has to convince me of that. Furthermore I don't think the Bible indicates that any religion would have absolute truth before the end of this age. Certain truths are important though. For example I think it would be difficult to get close to God and believe in eternal torment at the same time. But mainly I think it is the moral framework that I hold more important, and that moral framework includes certain obligations as Christians - hence the original questions.

The holy spirit cannot be misguided so evidently any error is as a result of human thinking.

The Bible doesn't say that the apostles taught any wrong doctrines ongoing, but it took a while for them to straighten some things out. Let's remember that they taught not just verbal doctrine but also by example. Peter sure didn't set a good one in how he dealt with the Gentiles at one point despite having personally received the "no partiality" vision from God.

It's obvious that anyone searching for the "perfect" religion in an absolute sense is going to end up disappointed. That's why I think it's important to sort out the fundamentally important things scripturally and base decisions on that.

BTW - no "puttin' up with" required - I came here to discuss this so feel free to fire at will.

N.drew

Do you believe you will "reap what you sow"? The religion of Jehovah's Witnesses does not teach to sow with a view to the spirit.

By putting God's New World at the forefront of their doctrine they learn to sow with a veiw to the flesh. (their flesh in paradise).

But if they were taught to sow with a veiw to the spirit, then the Spirit would lead them to the promise. They have replaced being led by spirit with being led by rules. They reflect the apostate Nation of Israel. Remember they asked for a human king. And it was allowed for them to do so because it was for a warning.

The warning is sounded, the messiah came, but most everyone is stuck on their tradition, even the witnesses are.

AGuest

Please tell me why the whole of Hebrews is about the gathering to the new covenent , then for one command the writer changes perspective and says gather together in the flesh? (Emphasis mine.)

The writer does NOT do this, dear N.Drew (the greatest of love and peace to you, dear on!). What you're asking is ABSOLUTELY accurate!!

I was going to pick out a few scriptures that support Hebrews 10:25 as meaning spiritually, but the whole book supports it.

YES!! YES, YES, YES!!!!!!! Oh, I am SO glad you "see" this, dear one! WHOO-HOOO!!! THANK YOU!

Sorry, I know it looks like I've gotten carried away, but the Spirit in me LEPT when I read your comments! I could NOT contain my joy! THANK you for sharing this; I have tried several times before. I TRULY hope those with ears hear and get the SENSE of this... and those who don't but want to... ask... and receive them.

Peace to you, dear one!

YOUR servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA

Twitch

The voice of the TRUE Light, however, the Lamb of God, is not loud OR boisterous; it is low and quiet. Although animals can hear it, a human has to really pay attention.

Aguest, just out of curiosity, what makes you believe that animals can hear the voice of god/jesus?

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

Share this