Posts by Pahpa

27

Will JWs leave the org because of accelerated doctrine change?

by cultswatter in

looks like the wts is morphing into a totally diferent religion.

they are trying to get new converts any way they can at the same time they are trying to patch previous doctrine in an attempt to give the illusion of true prophecy.. hey wts, no matter what you do it won't work.

the 1914 date is pure fiction, so is 1918/19.

Pahpa

Garybus

JWs seem to be their own worst enemies. This whole policy of shunning is counterproductive. Had anyone shown me Christian concern and kindness during my doubting period I also might have continued an active JW. But the opposite happened. The "brothers and sisters" withdrew from me and my family. The elders who called were not interested in my spiritual wellbeing. They only wanted to know whether or not I still recognized the Watchtower as "God's channel." When I expressed some doubts based upon the scriptures, they took judicial action and df'd me for "apostasy." Such is the "love" that exists in the organization!

16

Redemption of sin by Christ. OT support or made up?

by Spectrum in

does the ot support the christian doctrine that a heavenly messiah would come and redeem us of our sins, due to adams fall, hence the advent of jesus christ?

or was it a made up doctrine by the early followers of christ to give credence and purpose of existence to their faith?

if the latter is the case then it is understandable why the muslims believe that the christians are so wrong in belief in christ as a heavenly figure.

Pahpa

Nark

The early Christian Jews clearly saw the prophetic content of Isaiah 53 and is quoted in the N.T. as being fulfilled in Christ. Along with other prophecies which foretold the manner of the death (Ex.: Psalm 22) they also perceived the prophetic "shadows" and "patterns" in the Torah. Jesus becomes the fulfillment of the Passover lamb. It is his blood that atones for the sins like the sacrificial blood on the Day of Atonement. The author of Hebrews and Paul in his letters allude to these many times as well as other prophecies metioned in the Gospel accounts. (Col. 2:17, Heb. 8:5, 10:1 etc.) Christians accept these as prophetic fulfillments. Non-christians do not.

Like you, many of the Jews of Jesus' time refused to accept these as fulfillments of prophecy. They were opposed to the idea that Jesus was the Christ or Messiah. They rejected Jesus. Like good lawyers, they could rationalize many reasons why Jesus didn't fit their expectations of a true Messiah. And so it doesn't surprise us that this same attitude prevails among some today. It's all about faith. As I mentioned in an earlier post, one can accept the hypothesis of the Bible critics or one can accept the Bible as God's revelation. Obviously, you have faith in these higher critics. And that is your right and privilege.

14

Before the Elder Arrangement

by bavman in

for you "old timers"...lol!

what was procedure if someone seriously sinned and needed to confess?

also, was there less disfellowshipping going on?

Pahpa

bravman

I began to associate with JWs in 1952. The only time I remember disfellowshipping being used was in extreme circumstances. It usually involved adultery or fornication. I remember one instance where a person was disfellowshipped for denying the Watchtower. This person began to associate with one of the Bible Student groups that was considered "evil servants." As I recall the policy toward df'd individuals was about the same as today.

There was a brief time when the Society allowed association with df'd members "provided one did not talk about spiritual matters." All this changed with the disfellowshipping of the Bethelites and the "witch hunt" that followed in the early 1980s. And the cruel and unchristian policy remains to this day.

16

Redemption of sin by Christ. OT support or made up?

by Spectrum in

does the ot support the christian doctrine that a heavenly messiah would come and redeem us of our sins, due to adams fall, hence the advent of jesus christ?

or was it a made up doctrine by the early followers of christ to give credence and purpose of existence to their faith?

if the latter is the case then it is understandable why the muslims believe that the christians are so wrong in belief in christ as a heavenly figure.

Pahpa

The whole sacrificial arrangement of the Mosaic Law is based upon redemption through sacrifice. Add to this the number of prophecies which foretold a coming one that would sacrifice for the sins and transgressions of others. Isaiah 53 is but one example: "Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgression, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brough us peace was upon him and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter... For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken...."

How could the prophecies be any clearer than this?

58

How do JWs explain John 20:28?

by Zico in

much is made of john 1:1 in trinitarian discussions and there's a lot of debate over how it should be correctly translated, depending on your particular bias on the jesus god issue, but surely there is no scripture more clear that jesus is god than the one where thomas directly calls him god in john 20:28?

27next he said to thomas: put your finger here, and see my hands, and take your hand and stick it into my side, and stop being unbelieving but become believing.28in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

how do jehovah's witnesses deal with this scripture?

Pahpa

Narc

I divide the Bible commentaries into two categories. Those that take the "higher critics'" views as "gospel" (excuse the pun) and those that accept the more traditional views based upon God's inspiration of the Bible. In the last few years there have been many hypothesis presented by scholars that run counter to the ancient traditions of the Bible. And while these hypothetical postions are accepted as facts by many because of the seemingly erudite presentations of their authors they still remain hypothetical in spite of the faith that some put in them.

It reminds me of Paul's words: "For it is written: 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.' Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him." (1 Co. 1:18-25)

57

Jesus never used the name Jehovah???

by Mrs Smith in

my hubby and i have been doing a lot of bible reading are we correct by saying that jesus never once used the name jehovah?

if the name is so important surely jesus would have used it?

the jw's say that jesus was the greatest teacher and that we should follow his example so why are they using a name that jesus did not once refer to.

Pahpa

I remember once reading in some publication that the Jews accused Jesus of performing his miracles by using the name of God. ( As I recall, it might have been a reference in some Talmudic reference....but I'm not sure.) Of course, this whole issue of the use of God's name in the N.T. is argued by the Watchtower on the basis that a few of the Septuagint copies contain the tetragrammaton and that it is the Septuagint version that is quoted in the N.T. Thus, the Watchtower argues that Jesus must have used God's name when quoting from it. However, it is to be noted that no ancient greek copies of the N.T. contain the name. Jesus used the words "Father" and "God."

58

How do JWs explain John 20:28?

by Zico in

much is made of john 1:1 in trinitarian discussions and there's a lot of debate over how it should be correctly translated, depending on your particular bias on the jesus god issue, but surely there is no scripture more clear that jesus is god than the one where thomas directly calls him god in john 20:28?

27next he said to thomas: put your finger here, and see my hands, and take your hand and stick it into my side, and stop being unbelieving but become believing.28in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

how do jehovah's witnesses deal with this scripture?

Pahpa

Narkissos

Being a "gentile" Christian myself, there is no confusion in my mind about the intent of John's gospel. The "Jews" that John mentions that come in for criticism are those "Jews" who opposed and persecuted Christ and those other "Jews", the followers of Christ. (Jesus condemned the "Scribes and Pharisees" as well as the "Saducees" because of their general rejection of God's revelation with regard to his son. But on the other hand, many of these same men became followers of Christ.) The distinction is clear in the gospels. The earliest Christians were Jews. Their first persecutors were opposing Jews. It was only after the death of the apostles and their close associates that the attitude of the Gentile Christians changed toward the Jewish roots of the church itself. With the destruction of the Temple and the suppression of the Jewish rebellions against Rome, a strong anti-Jewish sentiment spread throughout the Roman Empire. The Gentile element in the church eventually became dominant. They became anxious to distant themselves from their Jewish origins particularly as the Romans thought of them as just another Jewish sect. Some of the Christian leaders became known for the virulent diatribes against the Jews.

I find in your postings that you give more weight and credence to the modern textual critics than you do to the more traditional and Biblical oriented commentaries. One senses that you really do not accept the Bible as God's revelation to man. Is this a true evaluation?

58

How do JWs explain John 20:28?

by Zico in

much is made of john 1:1 in trinitarian discussions and there's a lot of debate over how it should be correctly translated, depending on your particular bias on the jesus god issue, but surely there is no scripture more clear that jesus is god than the one where thomas directly calls him god in john 20:28?

27next he said to thomas: put your finger here, and see my hands, and take your hand and stick it into my side, and stop being unbelieving but become believing.28in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

how do jehovah's witnesses deal with this scripture?

Pahpa

Doug

I don't think there is any confusion between the OT and NT with regard to the relationship of Father and Son. At the time that the OT was written God was directing the worship of his people to Himself as differentiated between the many gods of the surrounding nations. But when God's son came down and faithfully sacrificed himself in obedience to his father, God bestowed all "power and authority" upon him. He fully represented his father. But he is never equal to his father. They were one in purpose and cause even as Jesus' disciples were "one" with him. "My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, JUST AS YOU ARE IN ME AND I AM IN YOU. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me I have given them the glory you gave me, that they may be ONE AS WE ARE ONE: I IN THEM AND YOU IN ME." (John 17 20-23) This seems very clear and understandable in contrast to the confusion of the trinity doctrine.

God's revelation is progressive. And this was certainly true of the revelation of his son.

31

Those who enter paridise, how are their sins paid for?

by drew sagan in

the wts teaches that when an individual physically dies he is 'aquitted' or 'set free' from sin.

the verse they use to support this view is romans 6:7 which reads: .

7 for he who has died has been acquitted from [his] sin.. .

Pahpa

The Scriptures are clear that it is only through Christ's sacrifice that men gain salvation. Peter said "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12) So, regardless of when, where or how men enter into "paradise" their salvation will be entirely based upon that sacrifice.

58

How do JWs explain John 20:28?

by Zico in

much is made of john 1:1 in trinitarian discussions and there's a lot of debate over how it should be correctly translated, depending on your particular bias on the jesus god issue, but surely there is no scripture more clear that jesus is god than the one where thomas directly calls him god in john 20:28?

27next he said to thomas: put your finger here, and see my hands, and take your hand and stick it into my side, and stop being unbelieving but become believing.28in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

how do jehovah's witnesses deal with this scripture?

Pahpa

Narkissos

I don't think there is any doubt that Paul was making reference to the specific Jews who were persecuting Jewish Christians in Judea. (1 Thess. 2:14) But I doubt that it was an "anti-semitic" prejudice against all Jews since Paul, himself, was a Jew as were the majority of those in the Judean congregations. Likewise, I am sure that John understood the same situation when he referred to the "Jews" who were opposers and persecutors of Jesus and his disciples. John speaks favorably of some Jews in the gospel account. He makes the distinction between those Jews who responded to the message and to those who became active opposers to it. He certainly wasn't painting the Jews "with a broad brush" of anti-semitic hatred.

Greendawn

Do you have the specific reference to that letter? I would be interested in its contents to see if it was based on fact or opinion. Much of Russell's Masonic connection has been based upon speculation and inference rather than solid facts.

Zico

The information contained in John 20:28 has to be taken into consideration with the context of John's gospel. For example, John 20:17 records Jesus' words "I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." And John summerizes his account about Jesus by saying "But these are written that yhou may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." (20:31) There seems little ambiguity to these statements.