by DATA-DOG 387 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
So then why are followers told they MUST follow this doctrine even if they know its false? The gov body then may release it a few months or years later as old light.
For example if i know now the blood doctrine or the current teaching of "generation" is crap and inrefuse to accept it because i KNoW its false..I get DF'ed, lose my family to shunning and basically am spiritually condemned...this is correct? Just? Honest? Loving from Jehovah?
DOT says
The Bible says to abstain from blood. How you decide to twist/interpret those words is up to you, but they are there in black and white. The FDS didn't make them up. As for beards, nobody is df'd for that, it is a personal decision. And when they predicted possible dates for Armageddon, they were just theories, not held as infallible in the way the Bibles words are. I meant that they don't go beyond the Bible in terms of doctrine.
Again I will refer you to jwfacts.com
please do verify the references
Birthday Celebrations
Blood Transfusions
Cross or Stake
Disfellowshipping
Earthquakes
Global Flood of Noah
Great Crowd and Other Sheep
Jehovah - God's Name?
Last Days
Mediator for only the 144,000
144,000 - a literal number?
Paradise Earth?
Preaching - only Witnesses?
Trinity
Changed Teachings
1800s - Changed Date Doctrine
1914 - Failed Doctrine
1925 - "Millions Now Living Will Never Die!"
1935 & Increasing Memorial Partakers
1975 Quotes
Beth-Sarim
Baptism Questions
Christmas, Birthdays & Flag Salute
Da Vinci Code - Freemasonry & Adventist links
Elder arrangement
Generation
Medical Advice
Prophecies - Revelation and Daniel
Resurrection - for whom
Superior Authorities
Worship Jesus
Zionism
Brainfloss: I have no idea what you mean to accomplish with that list. All of those things are unchristian practices, anyone practicing them unrepentantly is not serving Jehovah in a way acceptable to him. Therefore he has no place among Gods people.
" I heard a member of the G.B give a talk at an international assembly in 1974 .. quote "This is most likley the last convention before armagedden "
..What evidence do you have? No doubt they said this could be the last.
DOT,
I realize you have alot of responses. You picked out one sentence of my complete post to you, and that was a bit disappointing.
Yes I fully understand in your own words that you are "allowed those things" (meaning organs, vaccines, blood fractions).
BUT THIS IS EXACTLY THE POINT.
At one point in time, you were NOT "allowed those things". And these are not minor doctrinal issues that get changed in a Revelation book suppliment. These are things that are very important in medicine, society, and can even mean lives. So if you read my post seriously, and think of the statement in these terms, what do you think?
You have repeated this phrase...."current understanding of truth". That phrase by and large, is analgous to the word "guess". It is a guess based on what someone THINKS is accurate. You cannot enforce a GUESS with disfellowshipping and shunning my friend. It is not biblical, by a long shot.
Think for a minute what the phrase "partial truth" really is. Its like saying, I half half of my whole car. Can I drive it? No......I only have half of it.
The law was described as that which was partial, and it was replaced by that which was whole....Jesus. So you are telling me after jesus, we have reverted back to partial? Also, if you actually study the changes in doctrine, when they occur, and in what cultural context and setting they occur, then you have to acknowledge that these changes occured as much because of the overall zeitgeist, as they did any quasi-revelation. Organ transplants were forbidden, until they became mainstream. Did Jehovahs timetable include being behind the curve on that? Of course not! Its not even in scripture, unless you count the greater issue of sacredness of the gift of life.
Others are making the point as well my friend. Its OK to not have all of the answers. It is HUMBLE to recognize your limitations. Is it HUMBLE to call everything you do truth, and then reserve the right to change it, without consequence, while enforcing uniformity of belief on others?
I guess that is a personal question you need to ask yourself. This board is not full of drooling apostates that want to teach you the trinity or send you to war. it is full of men and women at various stages of their lives, most of which have rejected the religion of their youth, and that support one another because of losses and pain that are a result of being part of a highly controlling group.
We care about everyone that comes here, and the ones that don't.
DOT I went back and read this and wanted to zero in on it please....
.Who has the right to declare a belief to be wrong, except those appointed by God to do so? The Bibles words can be understood in many ways, as seen in Christendom. If you are declaring yourself to be right above those that God has allowed to be leading the organisation that bears his name, you are placing your eternal life in jeopardy. Read the account of Korah..
My friend. I mean this very seriously. If the GB has been appointed by Jehovah to declare any particular belief to be wrong, yet are allowed to be wrong themselves.....you are going to need to prove this scripturally. The GB in particular, a group that appoints its own members, and admit no "gifts of the spirit" including of course miraculous knowledge and understanding (since they have "ceased"), has been appointed by God to determine which beliefs are accurate?
If you are using Korah as the analogy, does this not make the GB Moses in the same analogy? I would agree it does, and they have used it in recent Watchtowers to that efffect.
One big problem. Moses experienced Jehovahs divine and miraculous involvement. He "spoke for God" ina very direct way. The GB has made VERY CLEAR that they are not prophets.....because truely if they were they would be false prophets yes? So they claim no miraculous guidance, or direction of their teachings, otherwise of course there is that prophet thing to deal with. Now it is exactly at the recognition of that self imposed limitation, that the analogy completely breaks down.
In fact.....didn't jeses say of the Pharisees with contempt!....."They have seated themselves in the seat of Moses".
Think about that for a minute.
Dot said
Brainfloss: I have no idea what you mean to accomplish with that list. All of those things are unchristian practices, anyone practicing them unrepentantly is not serving Jehovah in a way acceptable to him. Therefore he has no place among Gods people.
is that doctrine taken from jesus words?
See for your self taken from jwfacts.com
Jesus commanded that we not judge but love all, particularly those we consider our enemies.
Luke 6:27-37 "But I say to YOU who are listening, Continue to love YOUR enemies, to do good to those hating YOU, to bless those cursing YOU, to pray for those who are insulting YOU. To him that strikes you on the one cheek, offer the other also; and from him that takes away your outer garment, do not withhold even the undergarment.Give to everyone asking you, and from the one taking your things away do not ask [them] back. Also, just as YOU want men to do to YOU, do the same way to them. And if YOU love those loving YOU, of what credit is it to YOU? For even the sinners love those loving them.And if YOU do good to those doing good to YOU, really of what credit is it to YOU? Even the sinners do the same.Also, if YOU lend [without interest] to those from whom YOU hope to receive, of what credit is it to YOU? Even sinners lend [without interest] to sinners that they may get back as much. To the contrary, continue to love YOUR enemies and to do good and to lend [without interest], not hoping for anything back; and YOUR reward will be great, and YOU will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind toward the unthankful and wicked. Continue becoming merciful, just as YOUR Father is merciful. Moreover, stop judging, and YOU will by no means be judged; and stop condemning, and YOU will by no means be condemned."
Jesus introduced the standard on how Christian wrongdoers should be treated, saying at Matthew18:15-17:
"Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector."
Jesus did not say to never utter a word to an unrepentant wrong doer but to treat them as a tax collector. He himself spoke to and ate with tax collectors. (Matthew 9:11).
The majority of information on how to treat wrongdoers within the congregation comes from Paul and the main support the Watchtower uses to enforce shunning is from 1 Corinthians 5.
Paul showed a balanced approach to wrongdoers, advising not to socialise with such ones, but to still admonish [them] as a brother. 2 Thessalonians is key to understanding that wrongdoers should be marked, not disfellowshipped.
2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14-15 Now we are giving YOU orders, brothers, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition YOU received from us . 14 But if anyone is not obedient to our word through this letter, keep this one marked, stop associating with him, that he may become ashamed. 15 And yet do not be considering him as an enemy, but continue admonishing him as a brother.
Paul did not indicate that marking was only for non-serious sin as the word through this letter at 2 Thessalonians included those not glorifying the name of our Lord Jesus, those refusing to work for a living, and any who had been seduced by apostasy. Paul did not say to disfellowship and shun such people, but rather instructed the congregation to mark or take note of such a person, yet continue admonishing him as a brother. In similar vein the following scriptures do not instruct complete shunning of the person, but rather to take note so as not to be influenced by their wrong ways.
Romans 16:17 "Now I exhort YOU, brothers, to keep your eye on (the word 'mark' is used in many translations) those who cause divisions and occasions for stumbling contrary to the teaching that YOU have learned, and avoid them. "
Titus 3:10 "As for a man that promotes a sect, reject him after a first and a second admonition; knowing that such a man has been turned out of the way and is sinning, he being self-condemned."
At 1 Corinthians 5 Paul specifically outlined practices for which to cease mixing with a brother, yet this too is similar to the advice given when marking a brother.
1 Corinthians 5:11 "But now I am writing YOU to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Do YOU not judge those inside, while God judges those outside? Remove the wicked [man] from among yourselves."
1 Corinthians does not say to totally shun a brother who is a wrong doer, rather it says to quit mixing in company with such a person and not eat with such a man and hence refers to socialising. As the Watchtower has explained, this refers to socialising as friends.
"God's Word states that we should 'not even eat with such a man.' (1 Cor. 5:11) Hence, we also avoid social fellowship with an expelled person. This would rule out joining him in a picnic, party, ball game, or trip to the mall or theater or sitting down to a meal with him either in the home or at a restaurant." Kingdom Ministry2002 Aug p.3
This does not state that this type of person must never be spoken to. As Paul explained at 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 (quoted earlier), if they are at a meeting it would be reasonable to encourage them. Most certainly a polite greeting is acceptable.
1 Corinthians is also specific as to who these words apply to. This advice is in regards to a person"called a brother" who "is" a wrongdoer. No indication is given that they should be avoided when they are no longer recognised as a Jehovah's Witness brother. Nor does it say to shun a person who has stopped their wrongdoing. It is regularly the case that a teenage Witness is disfellowshipped for smoking or fornication. Years later they no longer practice what they were disfellowshipped for and are no longer known in the community as a brother, and so their continued shunning is unjustified.
It can also be noted that Paul did not insist that everyone participate in the shunning. Later he wrote that the "majority" participate in the rebuke, showing that some in the congregation may choose not to show rebuke to the person.
2 Corinthians 2:5-6 "Now if anyone has caused sadness M , he has saddened, not me, but all of YOU to an extent-not to be too harsh in what I say. This rebuke given by the majority is sufficient for such a man, …"
The New World Translation reference M shows Paul was here referring to the situation discussed at 1 Corinthians 5, (as do Christian scholars).
Paul gave similar advice on a number of occasions to 'mark' and 'avoid' wrongdoers. This does not mean that the person must be totally ignored, never uttered a greeting, avoiding eye contact, crossing the street to get away from, all common experiences of disfellowshipped Jehovah's Witnesses.
Watchtower extreme treatment of not even saying "hello" to a disfellowshipped Witnesses is not based on the above scriptures, but rather on a single statement at 2 John 7-11:
For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. Look out for yourselves, that YOU do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that YOU may obtain a full reward. Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to YOU and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into YOUR homes or say a greeting to him. For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.
2 John is referring to the antichrist and should not be applied across the board to all forms of sin, as done by the Watchtower Society.
In order to justify their stance, the Watchtower describes those that stop being Witnesses as apostate and of the Antichrist, saying that "the word apostasy comes from a Greek word that literally means a standing away from but has the sense of desertion, abandonment or rebellion ... [and included] abandonment of right moral standards ... willfully abandoning the Christian congregation thereby become part of the 'antichrist." Watchtower 1985 Jul 15 p.31 In reality, many who stop being Witnesses continue to follow Jesus and Bible morals, but have come to believe that the Watchtower Society is not directed by Jesus.
Interestingly, Johns advice here was not limited to former Christians. It included anyone denying Christ. This included Jews that rejected Jesus and people of the nations worshipping other Gods. Yet the Watchtower stance is to apply this only to Jehovah's Witnesses.
The meaning of the phrase never receive him into YOUR homes should be understood in the context of the hospitality of first century Jerusalem. Since Christians held congregation meetings in their homes John possibly felt that inviting a denier of Christ into a home could be viewed as sharing worship with non-Christians.
Likewise the term to never "say a greeting" needs to be understood in light of first century practice. In the following article, the Watchtower incorrectly claims that John used the term "greeting" to indicate a simple hello.
"John here used khairo, which was a greeting like good day or hello. (Acts 15:23; Matthew 28:9) He did not use aspazomai (as in verse 13), which means to enfold in the arms, thus to greet, to welcome and may have implied a very warm greeting, even with an embrace. (Luke 10:4; 11:43; Acts 20:1, 37; 1 Thessalonians 5:26) So the direction at 2 John 11 could well mean not to say even hello to such ones."Watchtower 1988 Apr 15 p.27
This article claims the word khairo is used to forbid a simple greeting, instead of aspazomai which means a more affectionate embrace, enfolding in the arms, kiss, greeting or welcome. This is incorrect, and the opposite is true. Strong's Concordance states;
2 John does not indicate a polite greeting is wrong. John here shows that a person is a sharer in the Antichrist's wicked works if he shows acceptance and agreement with the evildoers cause or teachings, or wishes them favour and success.
The Watchtower Society uses this single Scripture in 2 John to dictate that every disfellowshipped or disassociated person should not even be politely greeted. This is applied regardless of what the person was disfellowshipped for, including a long list of Society originated rules such as gambling, smoking, or authorising a blood transfusion. Every single one of a disfellowshipped persons Witness friends is told to never greet them again, unless they repent and are formally reinstated by the Watchtower Society. I am aware of friends whose own mothers or their own children have not spoken to them for upwards of 20 years. Yet such shunning is only ever discussed once, was only to apply to the Antichrist, and as such is being misused to its extremity.
Brainfloss, are you sure that WT still teaches that apostates are part of a composite antichrist? I thought there was a different take on that recently. Or perhaps I am confusing that witht he "evil slave" change they decided to come around to?
Paul, when was the last time this article was edited?
(good job by the way).
Thanks for considering these points:
1) "So you are saying that GOD allows the GB to interpret the Bible, even though it may be wrong.Correct??"
Your answer: In terms of interpreting prophecy, yes. The adjustments to the Revelation book show that a different understanding may be correct, but Jehovah will allow minor errors until he sees fit to correct them.
So, is the current interpretation that ONLY adopted sons of God at the World Headquarters of the WTBTS can interpret the scriptures, a "current understanding", or a correct understanding?
2) " Are you saying the incorrect interpretation of the GB was 'truth?' "
..
Your answer: It was our current understanding of the truth. Nobody has a complete understanding of truth, you cannot expect that of imperfect men.
Was that a Yes or a No? Do you think it is proper to say "It was our current understanding of the truth", if it was not true? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say, " It's was what we thought was correct at the time?" or, "It was our idea at the time?" It cannot be "truth" in any way, shape, or form if it does not meet criteria #2, it can ONLY be an idea. Would you agree or disagree?
" Do you believe that it is protection to DF people who bring errors to the attention of the GB or Elders? "
Your answer [ a yes??] ..Who has the right to declare a belief to be wrong, except those appointed by God to do so? The Bibles words can be understood in many ways, as seen in Christendom. If you are declaring yourself to be right above those that God has allowed to be leading the organisation that bears his name, you are placing your eternal life in jeopardy. Read the account of Korah..
I don't understand what you mean be "right to declare?" Don't we each have a responsibility to say if something is, or could be wrong? Are you saying that anyone who knows that an interpretation of men does not match scripture, is trying to place themselves above another? Why can't I be correct in addition to someone else or instead of someone else, like the GB who you admit to be fallible? Why am I accused of trying to go above anyone?
Are you saying the no human should have ever corrected Moses or Aaron? If you were present when Aaron was about to make a golden calf, would you have warned him not to do it? If you had been standing beside Moses and Aaron, and you knew they were going to claim that THEY called for the waters at Meribah, thereby costing Moses the chance of entering the promised land, would you have spoke up? Would warning Moses have been equal to rebelling against GOD? Wasn't the real issue the fact that Korah wanted to take over as boss??
DD
Problemaddict asked:
are you sure that WT still teaches that apostates are part of a composite antichrist?
not sure but they are definately "mentally diseased"
w06 12/1 pp. 4-7 makes the same connection
