They just reduced the bible by 13 % lol
The bible condemns Christian religions that teach, Wait!
by Crazyguy 40 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
DATA-DOG
Although SFPW will never answer a direct question, ( like the GB, except when forced under oath, which is why the new collective slave dogma exists. They fear being exposed more than anything else, but that is another story) these threads are important for honest people.
DS made a great point.. " Col 1:16 because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him." The brackets around [ other ] are gone. This leaves the dumbed down, errr.. simplified JW to believe that this is correct. After all, the GB are spirit-directed!
Here are some very simple question that SFPW cannot answer.
Q: What is the Christian hope according to God's word? What was the scriptural justification for Rutherford closing the heavenly door, thereby setting up a two-class Christian system? Who authorized him to do so? If Rutherford was incorrect, why is a doctrine based on his unauthorized human ideas, still being taught decades later?
-
GLTirebiter
How do Jehovah's Witnesses preach a gospel different than the apostles?
The Watchtower has a teaching different than the apostle John wrote in chapter 6 of his Gospel. Every year at the "memorial", the Watchtower teaches emphatically that the rank-and-file must not partake, but will nevertheless enjoy eternal life. But John, quoting Jesus, says that all believers must partake if they are to share in His eternal life:
" 'I am the living bread which has come down from heaven. Anyone who eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is my flesh, for the life of the world.'
Then the Jews started arguing with one another: 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?' they said. Jesus replied:
'I tell you most solemnly, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you will not have life in you. Anyone who does eat my flesh and drink my blood has eternal life, and I shall raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I live in him.' "
[The Jerusalem Bible (1966).]
-
Crazyguy
Everyones doing such a nice job here i dont even need to respond to SFPW. Nor will he respond because if hes a real JW then hes not standing for pure worship at all!!!
-
Stand for Pure Worship
Forgot about this thread. To be fair I'll independently research the points brought up in this thread, and then share my opinions later when I get a moment. Have to give credit where it's due, good thread. I'll probably not agree with 90% of this thread, but to be fair I'll consider the points referenced. Good thread, Crazyguy.
-
ShirleyW
Hey SPW after you do the research you mention above, on page 4 of the "Ran into some Witnesses int he Park" there's a question posted by two folks that you haven't answered yet.
-
Stand for Pure Worship
I've got a moment, so I'll respond to some of the comments on the first page.
UnstoppableRavens, I believe you're looking too far into our beliefs on faith by asserting that we believe more is needed to attain salvation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're alluding to works?- James 2:26. If so, Jehovahs Witnesses do not believe salvation is possible through works, rather works would be a natural byproduct of faith. James put it so eloquently by comparing the relationship between faith and works with a body lacking spirit. It's like your physician saying you need some exercise, otherwise you're going to deteriorate. You may say that you believe what that physician is telling you, however your actions prove otherwise. Likewise if you truly believe what the great physician Jehovah is telling you, your actions will testify on behalf of your faith. Paul's letter to the Galations contrasting the works of the flesh and spirit come to mind.
As far as Col 1:15-18, I compared the NWT with a King James version by Thomas Nelson, and I fail to see a difference between the two, that being with or without, "other." The "other" in verse 16 differentiates that who the verse was written about from that which his hand was responsible for creating.
Regarding Heb 11:13-16, the use of the word, "belonging", changes nothing when considering the context of those verses. Paul at that point wasn't talking about Sarah, or Abraham,, or Noah, nor Enoch. While it's true that he used their examples of faith as something for others to imitate, one cannot neglect the transition of who Paul was referring to starting in verse 14, as it noticeably is talking about anyone that chooses the path of a Christian. Verse 16 especially makes this clear when it states that, "now they are reaching out", this couldn't have referred to Sarah, Abraham, etc..
-
DS211
SFPW--i will remind you, please be a good JW and turn to you kingdom interlinear. It clearly does not denote "other" in it. now even if thomas wrote what youve obviously chosen because he supports your belief, the earliedt translation DO NOT have "other" there. think outside of your bubble mate.
-
villagegirl
SFPW - ???? Have you ever just sat down ad read the book of John ?
the book of James? How about anything in the new testament that is
recorded as the words of Jesus Christ. ??? In no scripture does Jesus
mention two classes of "sheep" The reference to other sheep, was to
Gentiles that were to be brought into the one flock. One hope, one flock.
No classes, no organization mentioned, no need for any men to be a "sole channel of communication"
since there was only one mediator between God and mankind and that was and is Jesus Christ,
direct up close and personal. That was the whole message, the whole gospel.
The Watchtower preaches a different gospel and is therefore accursed.
-
Stand for Pure Worship
Smiddy, I'll save us both the trouble over debating that, John 1:1 that is. Ray Franz didn't even agree with criticism of how the WT has printed that.
Fernando, ok.
Hamsterbait, I'll be straight with you. I am not a fan of how the NWT renders Hebrews 1:8, 9. However verse 9 when stating, and for emphasis it's the Father talking to the son, "Therefore God, your God has annointed you", and that's sufficient for me, that being the WT's intent on that verse was honorable. Comparing verse 8 in the NWT with other translations does give me the
Even their rational for rendering the text as they do leaves a bit to desire, the WT that is.