Posts by reslight2

66

Everyone Please Enter, I'm New Here

by tryingtoexit in

jw
friends

i've been lurking in the shadows of this forum for about 6 months or so.

i'll try to be brief here, but i apologize in advance if this is not "brief enough" for you.

anyways i'm a 27 year old african american young man, i was born and raised a jehovah's witness.

reslight2

God hasn't gone to sleep for the last 2000 years, unlike the false god that Charles Taze Russell created 1 Kings 18:27 Jeremiah 10:5 Isaiah 44:9

Since the God that Russell believed in is the "God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob," "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus," I am left wondering if the writer of the above really believes that the God of Jesus is a false god, and that Russell created the God of Jesus?

As far as the JWs, they have taken the English form of the holy name and brought reproach to that name through their denial of the ransom for all, claiming that millions of unbelieving men, women, and their children, will be eternally destroyed because of their blindness in not accepting the distorted "Good News" that they present.

Russell, however, should not be held responsible for the kind of "Good News" that the JWs preach, since he did not believe in that kind of "Good News."

Christian love,

Ronald

66

Everyone Please Enter, I'm New Here

by tryingtoexit in

jw
friends

i've been lurking in the shadows of this forum for about 6 months or so.

i'll try to be brief here, but i apologize in advance if this is not "brief enough" for you.

anyways i'm a 27 year old african american young man, i was born and raised a jehovah's witness.

reslight2

Charles Taze Russell was just crazy in all angles if you ask me, nobody wants to examine the evidence I present to my family, they just say read the Proclaimers book and sit down somewhere.

Charles Taze Russell was a Christian minister of God who presented more of what the Bible actually said than the traditionalists who seem to be more involved in thier traditions than Biblical truth.

Despite what the Jehovah's leadership claim, there was no "Jehovah's Witnesses" organization during the days of Russell. Russell was a non-sectarian who did not believe in such an authoritative organization. The Jehovah's Witnesses' "organization" doctrine was developed by Rutherford after Russell died.

Christian love,

Ronald

78

How Are JW's Sins Forgiven?

by Perry in

matthew 9:6 but that ye may know that the son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.. .

john 1:12 but as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of god, even to them that believe on his name:.

why did we beg for jehovah's forgiveness at every prayer when clearly the son has this authority?.

reslight2

Charles Taze Russell was born on Feb. 16, 1852, in Pittsburgh. His parents awed him at an early age with grim tales of hellfire and damnation. While helping his father build the family's chain of clothing stores, Russell began to question the validity of including the concept of eternal damnation in Christian dogma. Bible study, fascination with the Millerite, or Adventist, movement, and his own inability to reconcile hell with the Christian concept of mercy caused him to develop a personal theology which he began to teach others.
I have to wonder why you hang on so tightly to this part of the cult you were in. Could it be your experience?

Charles Taze Russell was a non-sectarian. He did not believe in an organization such as the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Yes, Charles Taze Russell did indeed learn the truth from Bible (with the aid others who had come before him) that the Bible hell is not a place of eternal suffering, however, he did believe in the Bible's teaching of eternal damnation. Russell did indeed reconcile the Bible hell with the Christian concept of mercy as revealed in the Bible.

The main emphasis of the Watch Tower in the days of Russell was on the atoning sacrifice of Jesus -- indeed, this was the main purpose for which Russell began to publish the Watch Tower magazine, that is, to defend that atoning sacrfice. Of course, if the immortal soul/spirt theories are true, then there was no need for any atoning sacrifice of Jesus. Likewise, if people who do not believe in Jesus in this age are judged (indivdually) to be eternally condemned to be in conscious suffering for all eternity, and they go into that eternal state when they die, then Jesus could not possibly have paid an atoning sacrifice to set them free from that eternal suffering so that they might be judged anew in the day of judgment, since their eternal judgment had already been set. (John 12:47,48) The man, Christ Jesus, gave his flesh for the life of the world, to be witnesses in due time. (John 6:51; 1 Timothy 2:5,6)

And, additionally, if the penalty upon man for disobedience in eternal conscious suffering for all eternity, then Jesus himself, in order to pay that penalty, would have to be now suffering for all eternity, whereas the Bible shows that he now suffers no more, having suffered once for sin. (1 Peter 3:18) In truth, God's wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), not eternal conscious suffering for all eternity. As a human being, Jesus is eternally dead, which was the condemnation through Adam (Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22), but as to his being made alive in the spirit, he dies no more. -- Romans 6:9; Revelation 1:18.

I thank God for opening the eyes of Russell to these wonderful truths!!!!

Christian love,

Ronald

http://hereafter.reslight.net

158

How many left???

by angel eyes in

does anybody know how many annointed are left alive??

our friend who was one of the annointed has died, i cried so much but then i was excited knowing shes in heaven meeting apostle paul, peter and brother knorr etc....wow how great is that :).

unsure how many are left though :((.

reslight2

I'd rather hang out with ole Joe Rutherford. I bet he's got a good still running up there... and with Crazy Taze providing the Miracle Wheat, that has to be some heavenly moonshine.

While this, I am sure, was meant to be amusement, many fail to know the real facts concerning "Miracle Wheat." Most of what is spread is the misrepresentation (putting it mildly).

http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/03/27/miracle-wheat.html

Christian love,

Ronald

158

How many left???

by angel eyes in

does anybody know how many annointed are left alive??

our friend who was one of the annointed has died, i cried so much but then i was excited knowing shes in heaven meeting apostle paul, peter and brother knorr etc....wow how great is that :).

unsure how many are left though :((.

reslight2

ALL Christians are anointed.
ALL of them.
Dead Christians are awaiting the first resurrection.

Sylvia,

I agree with this, except that I would say, all true Christians, all who truly belong to Christ, are anointed. There are many "tare" Christians who are not true Christians.

Nevertheless, the scriptures do not authorize anyone to classify some Christians as "anointed" and other Christians who are truly dedicated to God as not of the anointed. If you truly belong to the Christ (the Anointed -- Galatians 3:26,27), then you are of the Anointed -- the Christ, of the body of believers (Romans 12:5; 1 Corinthians 11:3; 12:12; 2 Corinthians 1:21) who accept Jesus as their head. -- Ephesians 5:23,30,32.

Christian love,

Ronald

20

If the WTS is not a False Prophet, what is it? surely the Bible identifies them as Apostates

by jookbeard in

through out the wts history it has claimed to be the only channel that god has selected to be his mouthpiece on earth, it calls itself ; the greater david, the jonnadab class, the faithful and discreet slave, the elijah class, the fulfillers of trumpet blasts in revelation, so on and so forth.

yet from it's inception by ct russel it promoted a unique brand of biblical beliefs that were meant to be accepted as bible truth, 1799 1874/1914, miracle wheat, the pleiades star constellation, the occult content found in the studies in the scriptures/divine plan of the ages etc, would jesus himself have selected a religious group who were promoting such beliefs?

impossible, also russel was embroiled in a serious sex scandal that was never satisfactorily answered.. the reign of joe rutherford whose first proclamation was to announce that he had served as a district judge, which was shown to be a lie, he went on to build beth sharim a luxurious house in expectation of the resurrection to earth of the faithful worthies , a failed prophecy that surprisingly failed to come true.

reslight2

Yet from it's inception by CT Russel it promoted a unique brand of Biblical beliefs that were meant to be accepted as Bible truth, 1799 1874/1914, Miracle Wheat, The Pleiades Star Constellation, the Occult content found in The Studies in the Scriptures/Divine Plan of the Ages etc

Russell did teach 1799 as the beginning of the time of the end, and 1874 as beginning of Jesus' parousia, and 1914 as the end of the Gentile Times and beginning of the time of trouble. While not being dogmatic, I tend to agree with him on these dates. Russell, however, never made the acceptance of these dates mandatory for one to be accepted as a Christian, and he indeed stated that he could be wrong regarding the Bible chronolgy and/or his expectations regarding 1914 many times.

Russell never made a teaching out of Miracle Wheat, although he did present the possibility of this wheat as being a foregleam, an example, of God's Kingdom, of the plentitude that is foretold for that kingdom. There was nothing wrong with that, nor did Russell do any kind of wrong-doing related to "Miracle Wheat," as many falsely claim.

For more on Russell and Miracle Wheat, see:
http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/03/27/charles-taze-russell-and-the-miracle-wheat-story.html

Although Russell was not dogmatic about the Pleiades, he based the idea that Jehovah's throne could possibly be in, or that Jehovah ruled the material universe from, the Pleiades based on an astronomer's statement that the Pleiades was at the center of the universe, and KJV rendering which speaks of the "sweet influences" of the Pleiades, and thus from this, and some othr Bible verses, combined with the astonomer's statement, Russell concluded that this "sweet influence" must refer to Jehovah's influence emanating from that constellation.

From Smith's Dictionary:

The Hebrew word (cimah ) so rendered occurs in (Job 9:9; 38:31; Amos 6:8) In the last passage our Authorized Version has "the seven stars," although the Geneva version translates the word "Pleiades" as in the other cases. The Pleiades are a group of stars situated on the shoulder of the constellation Taurus. The rendering "sweet influences" of the Authorized Version, (Job 38:31) is a relic of the lingering belief in the power which the stars exerted over human destiny. But Schaff thinks the phrase arose from the fact that the Pleiades appear about the middle of April, and hence are associated with the return of spring, the season of sweet influences .

While I believe that Russell was in error regarding the Pleiades, I do not think that this error is any where as near as bad as the errors many others make who are often held in high esteem. While it appears that the phrase "sweet influences" is not a good translation, I cannot knowledgeably attribute the motive for this usage by the KJV translators either to an "lingering belief in the power which the stars exerted over human destiny" nor to any association with return of spring, since I do not know for sure why the KJV chose to put the words "sweet influences" in the verse.

I have found no "Occult content" in "The Studies in the Scriptures," not unless one might speak of the "mysteries" that are spoken of in the Bible as being "Occult Content."

Christian love,

Ronald

20

If the WTS is not a False Prophet, what is it? surely the Bible identifies them as Apostates

by jookbeard in

through out the wts history it has claimed to be the only channel that god has selected to be his mouthpiece on earth, it calls itself ; the greater david, the jonnadab class, the faithful and discreet slave, the elijah class, the fulfillers of trumpet blasts in revelation, so on and so forth.

yet from it's inception by ct russel it promoted a unique brand of biblical beliefs that were meant to be accepted as bible truth, 1799 1874/1914, miracle wheat, the pleiades star constellation, the occult content found in the studies in the scriptures/divine plan of the ages etc, would jesus himself have selected a religious group who were promoting such beliefs?

impossible, also russel was embroiled in a serious sex scandal that was never satisfactorily answered.. the reign of joe rutherford whose first proclamation was to announce that he had served as a district judge, which was shown to be a lie, he went on to build beth sharim a luxurious house in expectation of the resurrection to earth of the faithful worthies , a failed prophecy that surprisingly failed to come true.

reslight2

Through out the WTS history it has claimed to be the only channel that God has selected to be his mouthpiece on Earth, it calls itself ; The Greater David, The Jonnadab Class, The Faithful and Discreet Slave, The Elijah Class, The Fulfillers of Trumpet Blasts in Revelation, so on and so forth.

I am not with the JWs, and on some of the points presented I agree with. However, I do not believe that one should project back on the WTS as it was in the days of Russell the later teachings of Joseph Rutherford. What Russell taught, and what the WTS was in the days of Russell, was totally different from the what Rutherford taught, and the WTS as Rutherford transformed it after Russell died.

Russell spoke nothing of, and did not believe in a "Watchtower organization."

What did Russell teach about "sole channel?" Absolutely nothing! A search through his works for the phrase "sole channel" produces absolutely nothing at all!

A search through Russell's writings for the phrase "only channel" shows that Russell believed that "only channel" between man and God is Jesus. Only once is the phrase "only channel" used of the Watch Tower, and then it is spoken of as being the only channel, not between God and man, but the as often the only channel by which Bible Students may be able to communicate with each other.

What did Russell teach about "the Greater David?" It should be obvious that Russell believed that the "greater David" was Jesus, not the Watch Tower, or any "Watchtower organization."

Likewise, a search through Russell writings for the phrase "Greater David" shows that Russell believed and taught that Jesus was the Greater David, in harmony with what the New Testament states.

Furthermore, Russell taught nothing about a "+Jehonadab +class".

Russell did speak of an Elijah class, but not in the same way that Rutherford and the JW leadership speak of such a class today.

For links that provide the above searches in the works of Russell, see:
http://reslight.net/forum/index.php/topic,914
(Please note that some results may include comments by others than Russell, which comments do not necessarily represent Russell's views.)

Nor did Russell believe in the "seven trumpets" in the manner described above. For a summary of what Russell taught concerning the seven trumpets, see Expanded Comments for Revelation chapters eight, nine and ten.
http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/commentaries/ExpCom.pdf

Russell, being a non-sectarian, did not believe in a human central authority or in any religious organization designed with such.

A quote from Russell:

I hold, and few, if any, will dispute it, that the one catholic or universal or general Church of Christ is the one mentioned
in the Bible--"the Church of the First-borns, written in Heaven." If this be admitted, my next proposition is that the Lord in Heaven records as members of His true Church all the saintly--whether Roman Catholics, Anglican Catholics, Greek Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc.--and none others.

Have we not here the one Church, the Catholic Church, the universal, the only Church which the Bible recognizes?
Pastor Russell's Sermons, page 460

Another quote from Russell:

Some of the dear brethren seem to find as much about Brother Russell in the Bible as they find about the Lord Jesus, and I think that is a great mistake. I do not find it there. Some of them say that I am blinded on that subject, that they all can see better than I can. Perhaps they can, I do not know, but I think, dear friends, that there is a danger in that direction, and I would like to put you all on guard. I think it is the Lord's will that we should recognize every agency God uses, but we are not to recognize any agency of God as being in any competition whatever with the Lord or with his divine arrangement. He is the fountain of blessing, he only is most to be praised. I think that is the right sentiment. I believe you all agree with that. And yet I think there is a danger of some dear friends preaching Brother Russell. Brother Russell would like for you not to do so.

He thinks it would not be to the glory of God. Let me repeat, then, dear friends, that in my opinion we have so much of the Gospel of God, so much of his plan to study, so many opportunities of showing forth his praises, that we should employ all our time in that way. My advice, therefore, is that we give very little attention to anything outside of that.
-1910; ("Convention Report Sermons", pg. 125)

Christian love,
Ronald

16

Russell and the Miracle Wheat Scandal

by Wild_Thing in

jw
friends

he truly was a crook, wasn't he?!?

i found this article on the brookly daily eagle website reminiscing about this scandal.

evidently, the newspaper outed him on this scheme and printed a cartoon of russell and his miracle wheat, and so russell sued them and lost!

reslight2

Of course, Russell was not a swindler or crook. I wonder how anyone could even think so after reading the true facts. But I suppose some will only see what they want to see. Lies seem to be much more fascinating than the truth. Russell was the main founder of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society; he was not the founder of "Jehovah's Witnesses". Russell did not believe in such an organization, nor did he believe what is taught by the JW organization. After Russell died, Joseph Rutherford, through deceit and legal trickery, gained control of the legal entity, The Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society, and used that legal entity as a basis for developing his new organization, and a set of teachings that Russell never believed. There never was any Watchtower stock, so how could Russell own 990 shares of such non-existant stock? Russell did not name the wheat "Miracle Wheat", nor was he the originator of any of the claims made for the wheat. The original claims were made by K. B. Stoner, who was never associated with the Bible Students, nor with the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, and also in a US Goverment report by one in the US Agricultural Department. In 1908, Russell presented in The Watch Tower a newspaper article that reported those claims, with the thought that this could be a sign of restitution. There never was any charge of incest, nor adultery, against Russell. Mrs. Russell flatly stated that she was not making such claims, which led the judge to have much of her testimony to be stricken from the records. Russell did not receive any of the money from Mr. Bonet's sale of Miracle Wheat. Mr. Bonet donated the money to the Watch Tower Society, not to Russell. The price offered in the Watch Tower was the same price Mr. Stoner (who was not associated with the Watch Tower) was asking for his "Miracle Wheat" at the time the notice was prepared. The Watch Tower offered to return money to anyone who was not satisified. Not one person asked for their money to be returned. I could go on and on, but the facts are available, if anyone wishes to know the truth: http://ctr.reslight.net In service of Jesus and his God, Ronald

56

The Trinity ( arguement to end all arguments I hope )

by 5go in

i pretty much don't think much of christendom.

but why do christians insist on holding such an unholdable position with the trinity.. the bible i agree holds proof for both trinity and nontrinity positions.. i still don't get why that christians other than catholics would hold such an untenable position as god came down to earth but didn't, and he prayed ( talked ) to himself a lot.. .

i remember a comedy sketch were some kids were stumping a nun in catholic school with question on the trinity and the eurachrist..

reslight2

The statement is made that Jesus is called 'the first and the last' in Revelation 22:13. Is this really Jesus speaking? I believe that this verse is quoting Jehovah, the One who sits on the throne and not Jesus, represented as the Lamb to approaches the One who sits on the throne. Nevertheless, Jesus does refer to himself as 'the first and the last' in Revelation 1:17 and Revelation 2:8. Does this mean that Jesus is without beginning and without end, from everlasting to everlasting, as is his God and Father, undieable? The claim is often made by trinitarians that Jesus the human died, but Jesus the alleged 'God Amighty the Son' did not die, nor can he die as God Almighty, since as God Almighty he is 'the first and the last', never ceasing to exist. They do not stop to read the scripture careflly, since it Jesus speaks of himself as the "The first and the last, who was dead." Yes, "the first and the last" (as Jesus applied this designation to himself), did indeed die. Thus, there is no proof in the designation of Jesus as 'the first and the last' that this means that Jesus is "God Almighty". In service of Jesus, Ronald

56

The Trinity ( arguement to end all arguments I hope )

by 5go in

i pretty much don't think much of christendom.

but why do christians insist on holding such an unholdable position with the trinity.. the bible i agree holds proof for both trinity and nontrinity positions.. i still don't get why that christians other than catholics would hold such an untenable position as god came down to earth but didn't, and he prayed ( talked ) to himself a lot.. .

i remember a comedy sketch were some kids were stumping a nun in catholic school with question on the trinity and the eurachrist..

reslight2

So the NWT itself is saying that Jehovah and Jesus have the same title "Mighty God".
How can this be if there is only one God?

I am not with the JWs, but I do agree with them concerning the trinity, and that Jesus is not Jehovah.

How could Jehovah and Jesus have the same time of "Mighty God"? In a similar way that the rulers spoken of in Ezekiel 32:21 have the same title. The same Hebrew phrase is used also in Ezekiel 32:21, although gibbor is plural in this verse, (elei gibborim) to accommodate the fact that more than one is being spoken of. In this verse, as far as we know, no English translation renders the Hebrew word EL as "God", but rather with its general meaning of "might", "power", "strong", etc. The King James Version renders the Hebrew phrase (two Hebrew words) in Jeremiah by using five English words: "The strong among the mighty". In other words the King James translators recognize that the word EL here is not referring to the Supreme Being, but rather that it is being used of generic "strength", thus they rendered it as "strong". Similarly, the World English Bible translation renders the verse as:

The strong [ELIE] among the mighty [GIBBORIM] shall speak to him out of the midst of Sheol with those who help him: they are gone down, they lie still, even the uncircumcised, slain by the sword.

Jay Green's interlinear (word-for-word) rendering is: shall speak to him The strong [EL - Strong's #410] of the mighty [gibbowr - Strong's #1368] from the of midst Sheol.

Here we have the phrase El GIBBOR, although it is plural in the Hebrew, it is the basic same phrase of Isaiah 9:6, speaking pictorially of the kings who had already lost their rulership to the king of Babylon, as though they were in a death-like condition in sheol. The New Living Bible translates this phrase as "mighty leaders". The New Century translation renders it: "the leaders of the mighty ones." Rotherham renders it: "the chiefs of the mighty." The Geneva Bible renders it: "The most mighty & strong." The Bishop's Bible translates it: "The mightie worthies." Wycliffe renders it: "The myytieste of stronge men." Most translations render it something like "the strong among the mighty". Using these translations of Ezkiel 32:21 as a pattern, EL GIBBOR in Isaiah 9:6 could also be rendered "Mighty and Strong", or "Mighty One of Strength", especially since the context shows that the one being spoken of is not the only true God, Yahweh. However, with the reasoning often presented, that EL GIBBOR can only apply to Yahweh, then by this same manner of reasoning we should conclude that all the kings pictured as speaking from sheol are Yahweh the only true God. The fact is that the reasoning is false; EL, when used of others than Yahweh, takes on a general meaning of strength, might, power, etc., and thus EL GIBBOR can be used of others without designating them as the Supreme Being.

As I have pointed out on the RL website*, the word El has a dual meaning, one of which is the Might of the universe (Supreme Being), and the generic meaning of "strength", "power", "might", etc. This word is Hebrew #410 in Strong's Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary, which defines it as: "short. from 352; strength; as adj. mighty; espec. the Almighty (but used also of any deity)." Crosswalk's Online Hebrew Lexicon defines it similarly: "shortened from 0352 TWOT - 93a n m ; AV - God 213, god 16, power 4, mighty 5, goodly 1, great 1, idols 1, Immanuel + 06005 2, might 1, strong 1; 245; 1) god, god-like one, mighty one; 1a) mighty men, men of rank, mighty heroes; 1b) angels; 1c) god, false god, (demons, imaginations); 1d) God, the one true God, Jehovah; 2) mighty things in nature; 3) strength, power". (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=0410) Other authorities give it the same or similar meanings. Consequently it is applicable to any powerful being and especially so the most powerful - the Almighty Yahweh.
==========
*See the study on "The Hebraic Usages of the Titles for 'God'":
http://godandson.reslight.net/hebraictitles.html In service of Yahweh and his Son, Ronald