I'm a newbie too (page 2)

mensa163

flowerpetal
None of us can be part of the 144,000
That is unless we are Jews desended from one of the 12 tribes of Isreal and have the seal of the living God with his name & Jesus name on our forehead during the end times

mensa163

flowerpetal
You are correct in sensing differences between Jesus slant & Paul's version. Jesus audience at the time was predominantly Jewish and taught as such. Paul's main mission was as the apostle to the Gentiles (most of us) and that is why he explains things a different way at times. Both messages apply of course, just directed to different groups & you are pretty sharp to have observed this. Good questions you raise.

thinkers wife

Hi FP,
Welcome to the board. I too wonder about some of Paul's writings. Good to see you have an open mind. Looking forward to hearing more from you!
TW

uncle_onion

Hi Flower petal

Welcome to the board and it is good that you have an opened mind. If you decide that the JWs are for you, then good on you, at least you would have come to that informed decision on your own.

I have a question for you, If only 144000 go to heaven then can you please explain to me what 1 John 5:1 is all about where it says "everyone"?

UO

outnfree

Welcome, Flowerpetal!

I, too, look forward to discussing this "born again" matter as I have some questions, too. But maybe Simon would rather it be discussed in the Beliefs, Doctrine... etc. forum? (See his Why...? thread in that category).

Nice to have you aboard!
outnfree

Flowerpetal

Dedalus,
You are hysterical! Thanks for the chuckle!

---
In time the savage bull doth bear the yoke -- Much Ado About Nothing (Shakespeare)

Flowerpetal

Ok here is what I think: Jesus was very broad in making his statement to Nicodemus about being born-again. It simply includes being born of water (as in baptism) and spirit (aren't we told that all JWs have the holy spirit--as much as the anointed do?) And at baptismal talks, the candidates are told that from that day on, they are ordained ministers being ordained by God. Doesn't that include some holy spirit there?

OTOH, Paul, I believe is narrowing this down to a specific part of being born again, because his points were for those who had received a heavenly calling as adopted sons of God. That would be the anointed. Whatever I understand, from the Insight book, on this subject about the anointed having righteousness imputed to them, yadda, yadda, yadda, I hear the same thing from born-again Christians.

However, this one particular scripture really drives home the point for me and I feel the society should address it:
1 John 5:1 "Everyone believing that Jesus is the Christ has been born from God, and everyone who loves the one that caused to be born loves him who has been born from that one."

So by stating that only the anointed are born-again, the society is implying that the great crowd hate and disbelieve in Jesus and his Father. I don't like that implication and I think it needs to be addressed by them soon.

Flowerpetal

Hi Prisca! You stated:
Welcome! I was at the same stage as you are, two years ago. I could see that the way JWs practised Christianity was not the way Jesus told us to be. It lead me to really look into the religion that I had known all my life.

------
While I have questions, I feel I can practice Christianity the correct way and still be a JW. I really try to follow the scriptures even though I have loads of questions about the apostle Paul's several statements. I am beginning to realize that Jesus' words come first because he was God's son, and perfect, and nothing else really needed to be added.

---
In time the savage bull doth bear the yoke -- Much Ado About Nothing (Shakespeare)

Flowerpetal

Just want y'all to know that while I'm a newbie on this board, I have been a baptized JW for 41 years. And my mom carried me to the hall since I was an infant. So now, in my old age (heh heh) of 53, things are starting to click in my mind. Being on another board has helped to because I have learned other people's viewpoints who are in other religions.

---
In time the savage bull doth bear the yoke -- Much Ado About Nothing (Shakespeare)

terraly

You said:
"While I have questions, I feel I can practice Christianity the correct way and still be a JW. I really try to follow the scriptures even though I have loads of questions about the apostle Paul's several statements. I am beginning to realize that Jesus' words come first because he was God's son, and perfect, and nothing else really needed to be added."

So what do you think about Paul's statements? For instance, his comments on women... my personal beliefs about the nature of the Bible are quite different from the accepted Witness perspective. That is, I think it was written by regular old people- who saw things, and thought about things, and perhaps now and again were actually inspired by God, but mostly it is them trying to make sense of things- and not God speaking direcfly and infallibly to us.

So Paul doesn't worry me, because I realize he can come to incorrect conclusions. He never claims to be right all the time, and in fact often says that he is merely spouting his only opinion. There are times, I think, when he simply forgets to add this disclaimer.

Jesus, on the other hand, if you accept the message of the Bible, must have known what he was talking about. The writers of the gospels may not have recorded everything prefectly, but they probably did pretty well.

Often Paul does seem to go against Jesus' teaching, and I would always stick with Jesus first. One good example of this is blood:

Luke 7:14-15
Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a man can make him `unclean' by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him `unclean.' "

While Paul, as we all know, adds prohibitions against blood. Now this is often explained as "refining" Jesus' message, but his words need no refining, or explanation. He didn't state them with qualifiers...

Paul, I believe, was reflecting his own upbringing with his comments in Acts. He was so used to the idea of a dietary law and restrictions, that he really couldn't understand Jesus' statement (if you read following the verse quoted above you will find that his disciples couldn't understand this either).

There are, I believe, other important examples where Paul's words prevent us for clearly hearing Jesus' extremely challenging truths. Not that I dislike Paul, I respect a lot of his philosophy and reasoning, and I think he grasps some parts of Jesus' message very well, but there are occasions where he fails.

I'm a newbie too

Share this