I think there's an excellent case to be made not only for life after life, but life before life. If Jesus had a pre-mortal life and if Jerimiah (Jer. 1:5) had one, why not us? Remember the apostles asked Jesus, "Master, who did sin, this man or his parents that he was born blind?" Jesus could have responded by saying that they were erring, not knowing the scripture, or he could have corrected them some other way, but he didn't.
Cold Steel
JoinedPosts by Cold Steel
-
65
Life after death OR Consciousness after death?
by Space Madness inare we conscious after death?
if we don't understand why and how consciousness exsist now, how do we know it doesn't continue after death?
can consciousness survive the death of the body?
-
-
-
19
Is JW Baptism the Only Valid Baptism?
by Cold Steel inwhat is the watchtower bible and tract societys view on baptism?
is it absolutely essential that one be baptized to gain eternal life in gods kingdom?.
and can they tell you who you can and cant baptize?.
-
-
Cold Steel
Laika: This could be a problem for the evangelicals (baptism is only a symbol!?) but less so for the JWs. They think the scripture you quoted is a later [addition] and has been removed from their recently revised New World Translation.
Okay, you begin by talking about evangelicals and end by saying the passage about Jesus saying, “He who believeth and is baptized shall be saved” has been removed from “their” recently revised New World Translation. I’m assuming by “evangelicals” you mean the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.
Well, the Society can remove what they want from the scriptures, but just because an earlier version doesn’t have a phrase or passage doesn’t mean it’s the most pristine version. If the pristine version turns out to be the later version (because it was copied from an earlier, pristine, document), then the translator has made an error. Some scholars believe this was the case for the end of the Lord’s prayer: “For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory, forever. Amen.” The reason, because without it the prayer just ends prematurely. In short, the later version with the missing passage makes more sense than the one that just ends. This may be because the earlier source is correct, or it could be that later clerics noticed the gap and added something appropriate to make it end with greater effect.
So this is only something that can be answered by revelation. It’s clear that many believers have, for one reason or another, not been baptized. And it’s clear that many people have lived and died without hearing the gospel preached. This is one reason the scriptures state that while Jesus’ body lay in the tomb, his spirit went “and preached to the spirits in prison” which sometimes were disobedient in the days of Noah. Peter also states, “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.” (See 1 Peter 3:18-20; 1 Peter 4:6.)
Thus, even though these people may be dead, they can hear the gospel preached to them so they may be “judged according to men in the flesh,” yet “live according to God in the spirit.” This is one reason the soul sleeping doctrine just doesn’t work.
If Mormons still have apostles do they have confession and absolution (based on John 20:23)? Am I right in saying Mormons believe Peter, James and John are still alive and wandering the Earth or is this is a myth like the 'magic' underwear? And if so, how come your leaders haven't included them in the Mormon group of 12 apostles?
There are sins of a serious nature which must be confessed with one’s bishop, who are given the keys of authority over their jurisdictions. And if the Holy Spirit dictates, they can forgive sins.
As for Peter, James, and John wandering the earth, no. They appeared only to convey the higher “Melchizedek” priesthood and the Keys of the Kingdom, though not all at once. Moses and Elijah later returned with additional keys. Moses restored the keys of the gathering of Israel, which coincidentally began very shortly after the keys were conveyed, and Elijah appeared in fulfillment of prophecy with the keys to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children and vice versa. In all cases, the keys were restored to two men, fulfilling the law of witnesses. When Muhammad, Joan of Arc, Ellen G. White, and, later, Charles Taze Russell, claimed some angelic ministration, they were the only ones who experienced it. There were no witnesses. The Book of Mormon had three witnesses who saw the angel, the gold plates upon which the scriptures were written, heard the voice of God and to their dying days never once denied their testimony. There were also eight witnesses who saw only the gold plates, with no angel, no voice of God, and so forth. They, too, never denied their testimonies. In short, in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
Now much has been said about the so-called “magic underwear” that is worn by members who have been through the temple. These are simply sacred vestments worn under the clothing (see Exodus 28). Many priesthood recipients wear vestments over the clothing; however, because the Latter-day Saints have a lay priesthood, our vestments are worn under our street clothing.
Again, touching on Peter, James and John, these men were apostles in their own day and they hold the keys of their dispensation, which is called the Dispensation of the Meridian of Time, in which Jesus lived. Today, we believe that Joseph Smith and others hold the keys of the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times in which the “restoration of all things” will be completed. According to our teachings, the keys of the kingdom have been restored for the last time and will never be taken from the earth, but will remain here throughout the Millennium.
.
-
19
Is JW Baptism the Only Valid Baptism?
by Cold Steel inwhat is the watchtower bible and tract societys view on baptism?
is it absolutely essential that one be baptized to gain eternal life in gods kingdom?.
and can they tell you who you can and cant baptize?.
-
-
Cold Steel
Bobcat: as far as personal entry (into the Christian community) is concerned, God desires 'all to be saved' (1 Tim 2:4), and baptism, as a ritual for entry into the Christian community, was already determined by Jesus (Mt 28:18-20). The commentary above footnotes the fact that "keys" (plural) is more suited for storehouses than for an admission gate.
The “keys” are, I believe, metaphors, not for entry into Heaven, but binding powers or, as the ancient texts put it, “sealings.” When someone was baptized, it required authority. If someone came along, as they later did, and say that the Lord accepts sprinkle baptism as well as, or instead of, immersion, such would require the correct authorization. We know that John the Baptist, through the lineage of his father, held the ancient priesthood of Aaron, the brother of Moses. It was important that those baptized in the new church be baptized by authorized and ordained ministers of the gospel who acted under the direction and authorization of the apostles, who were the general authorities of the church.
The Keys of the Kingdom were intended to ensure that the apostles maintain control over the church and the way the ordinances were administered. Naturally, if someone obtained an ordinance through deception, the keys would not override the judgment which Jesus, alone, holds the keys of.
And see Isaiah's comments about "Shebna" in Isa. 22:15-19, who was the "steward" prior to Eliakim, and see if you notice any similarities between him and the current GB.
“And I will drive thee from thy station, and from thy state shall he pull thee down.” —Isa. 22:19
Well, I can see where it would be significant to former Jehovah's Witnesses; however, to a non-JW, the Governing Body was never in a legitimate station or state. Keep in mind that the religion is in a peculiar position. Jesus clearly had a church, yet for some reason I truly don’t understand, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society doesn’t claim to be a church. My question is, how can a publishing company oversee an ordinance like baptism? How can it speak for God if it has not the necessary keys?
Again, how do we know they’re necessary? Because Jesus wouldn’t have taken the time or effort to 1) mention it to Peter, and 2) actually confer the keys? Recall that he said, “And I will give unto thee....” (meaning it was a future event). He could have said, “And I give thee the keys” but he didn’t say that. If the Jehovah's Witnesses represent God today, they have to either purport one of two possibilities: One, that they’re no longer needed, or two, that they possess said keys today.
Instead, the Outfit has decided to ignore them, which isn’t acceptable as far as I’m concerned.
If Blondie has her ears on, perhaps she can search her documentation for “Keys of the Kingdom.” Or maybe someone else knows.
.
-
6
It's all an act
by stillin inthat is what the local elder told me when i said that i didn't feel qualified to have a certain service meeting part because i felt less than exemplary in that particular area.
my conscience bothered me to tell others to do better when i wasn't so great myself.. that elder is now a kms instructor/do.
go figure..
-
-
Cold Steel
What did he want you to do, be in a skit? So what did you tell him? Is he the type of person that would be a cynic?
-
-
-
Cold Steel
Unstoppable: I thought it would not [be a] big deal. It's not, really, except it made me feel like trash, worthless.
Ummm...you don't suppose that's how they wanted you to feel, do you? Remember, it's your house, too, and how do you suppose they would feel if you kicked them out?
"Hey, honey, have you se...oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know you had company. Anyway, where did you put the Ouija Board after we used it last night? Also, did you leave me a piece of your birthday cake? I know you gave blood yesterday, but there was still plenty of cake left. Uh, didn't mean to interrupt you ladies...later!"
.
-
17
the annointed- let me get this straight
by nowwhat? inso there are roughly 12,000 "annointed" here on earth right now.
even though they are christ's brothers and the new testament was written just for them, they have no say on how "jehovah's organazation" is run and the the things taught.
makes sense to me!!!
-
-
Cold Steel
Oppostate: The latest from the Gooberning Bawdy is that only them, the 8 that are part of this Gooberning Bawdy, are the ones in charge of dispensing spiritual food....
The problem is, anyone can claim to be one of the anointed, but the Governing Body is known to be bonafide slaves...the real deal. If I were a Jehovah's Witness, I could claim to be one of the anointed, partake of the Memorial emblems just for the prestigue of it. Any authority that was given me would mean that they were giving power to someone who was self-appointed and my anointed statis would be moot. Jehovah's checks and balances system ensures that only those known to be anointed and representative of the rest would have the trusted power over doctrines and other spiritual food.
Remember, as the apostle John wrote: "When you're a slave, you're a slave all the way; from your first breath of life to your last dying day!" (Rev. 22:19)
.
-
48
Satan thrown to earth "about" 1914?
by wearewatchingyouman inso i'm thumbing through the new "silver sword" and i notice that in the appendix under "message of the bible" that it says, "about 1914 jesus hurls the serpent satan to the earth...." i can't remeber ever hearing the word "about" and 1914 placed together before in regards to this event.
are there any jwapologists, or anyone else for that matter, who have an explanation for this?.
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/appendix-b/message-of-the-bible/.
-
-
Cold Steel
WatchingYou: I recently asked an elder about this. He said, “The war in heaven started in 1914 definitively. But how long did it take for Satan to be ousted? We don't know. It may have happened late 1914 or early 1915. So saying “about 1914” would accurately describe Satan’s being cast out, not when the Kingdom started ruling.”
This is an area in which the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has really blown it. No other Christian sect believes that the “war in heaven” took place in the 20th Century, and extra-biblical Christian scripture sustains the Christian tradition that the great war in heaven took place before man had been placed on the earth. It was shortly after the grand council in which Jeremiah (Jer. 1:5) and other noble spirits had been called and ordained before their births. In the Nag Hammadi library, an ancient Coptic library discovered in 1947, Adam and Seth also had been present. (See Gospel of the Egyptians, III,51.5–17; 54.8–9; 59.12–15; 60.25–61.1 (NHL, 199–200, 202; also, Second Treatise of the Great Seth, 54.14–55.15 [NHL, 331–32]). Satan was ousted to the earth with his angels at around the same time Adam was placed in the Garden. In fact, the war resulted over something that happened in the council, a rebellion by Satan and one-third of the hosts of heaven.
I know of no tradition or doctrine or passage of scripture that would indicate that the war in heaven took place after the Christian era. Isaiah had seen it centuries before in vision. So why should we, or anyone, believe it happened in 1914/15?
.
-
-
-
Cold Steel
Unstoppableravens: ...we did study together for a while and she would tell me that she learned alot from our studies but she put a stop to that because i would not study a wt publication. i told her when we study she could use one but when the bible said differnt we would have to figure out why. that did not last too long and she said no more studies at all.
Well, perhaps the situation is salvageable to some degree.
Your wife sounds as though she is communicating and that’s good. Perhaps you should concentrate on the root of your differences. If she wants to use the Watchtower, start with the assumption that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society is what it claims to be. What are the major evidences, in her mind, that it is of God? When has she had the thought that wow, no one could have had these amazing insights without being directed by the Jehovah! Ask her to explain some of these insights and some of the demonstrable prophetic insights published by Society leaders since its inception, leaving out, of course, all the “invisible” signs of the Kingdom’s coming and concentrating on actual prophetic fulfillment. This is quite easy to do with the ancient church. Jesus’ foretelling of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, for example. There was no “spiritual” fulfillment; it was an actual, literal fulfillment.
If you can concentrate on these, you can utilize both the Bible and the Watchtower publications. If the Society can be shown to be the Lord’s church on Earth, then there’s no point denying it. But if the prophecies dead end and the doctrines fit like square blocks into round holes, then she ought to wake up and smell the coffee! It’s not a difficult procedure and, to me, it’s fairly self-evident to see which way this thing would come down, but sometimes you just have to reverse engineer events and see if they pan out.
Communication is key, and if she at any point becomes angry and puts her foot down, you won’t make any progress. And you can bet that not only your in-laws will be working against you, but the Outfit! When you’re not around, you can expect divisive forces to chip away at your credibility, righteousness and character. If your wife sees the light, it will create problems with her family and then they will resent YOU for causing her to stumble.
You almost can’t win.
.vvvvvv
-
-
-
Cold Steel
Although I consider the Jehovah's Witnesses a manmade religion with no apostolic authority whatsoever, I can feel for his wife. The big question is, what is she going to do? What can she do?
I can understand it better when someone is born into the Outfit and its legitimacy is drilled into their heads from an early age. But for the life of me, I can't understand people who would buy into it as an adult. My biggest problem with the group-think is that they buy the Outfit's legitimacy as a given, and it has not one iota of evidence that God is behind the organization. When they used to come to my door back in the 70s, they would make sure that I understood that all religious sects today were manmade, but they, somehow, were created and organized by God.
Is the Outfit a church? The GB says no, they're not a church.
Do they call their officers? No, they take the honor unto themselves and appoint them.
Do they ordain anyone? Nope.
Do they have the same officers as the ancient church? Well, no. It has elders and overseers (bishops), but that's about it.
Where does it say in scripture that rank and file members have to go door to door? No place I've seen.
How about the weekly meetings to read the Outfit's newsletters? Again, not in scripture.
Do the leaders (GB) receive revelation from God in the way of angels, visions, theophanies, etc.? No, they hear a voice inside their heads that tell them how to badly interpret scripture.
Do they have the ancient keys of authority? Nope, they can bind in heaven or earth without 'em.
How about the baptism of water and the Spirit. Do they confer the Holy Spirit on members through the laying on of hands. No, but they baptize by immersion. The other is no longer necessary, even though it was done anciently with all members.
You start asking these questions and it doesn't look good. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established, the scripture states; but the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has no such witnesses that can ascertain their ministerial authority.
I think the more JWs know about the Bible and about the New Testament practices, the more the above answers should bother them. After reading the gospels, they should begin with Acts and mark down every religious principle written that is not taught by the Outfit. You'll see that your notebooks will fill up very rapidly. Then write your own questions with scriptures as answers and insert them into the questions the Outfit tells their members to ask investigators. As head of the house, Unstoppableravens, can you lead your family into such a study? I know it's not encouraged...that is, to study the Bible in lieu of the magazines. But can you put the magazines aside and see what the Bible says about the above, and about prophecy like Armageddon. Does your reading of the Bible match the teachings of the Governing Body?
And oh yeah, get a tree this Christmas and put on some colored lights (not the white ones).
.
-
19
Is JW Baptism the Only Valid Baptism?
by Cold Steel inwhat is the watchtower bible and tract societys view on baptism?
is it absolutely essential that one be baptized to gain eternal life in gods kingdom?.
and can they tell you who you can and cant baptize?.
-
-
Cold Steel
Thank you all for your contributions to this thread. And especially you, Blondie.
Julia Orwell: Since JWs believe they are the only true religion, any other baptism is not considered legitimate. However, if I were to get baptised with another church...that would annul my JW baptism I think, as I would be considered 'apostate' and disassociating myself.
Yes, so baptisms by “apostate” Christians have no valid authority. But what if a person were baptized by a non-denominational Christian, someone who said, “We have no established doctrine or creeds, but we will baptize you by immersion in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”? My point is, what makes the Jehovah's Witnesses believe that they hold the “keys” to baptize, and that no one else may do it? Doesn’t it stand to reason that this sort of authority must come from God? And if so, how did it get from God to Pastor Russell, and from him to his successors? As far as I can ascertain, there are no hands-on-head ordinations within the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, and the reason is most telling. Ordination implies that one have heavenly, ministerial authority which can be passed on, and despite all the claims and counterclaims within the Society, the leadership must know that it doesn’t have this authority.
When one is baptized, we’re told, he or she becomes an “ordained” minister in God’s earthly kingdom. Whoa! Where did that come from? I’d like to see the references for that, as I’ve never seen that even remotely mentioned in either the Old or New Testaments.
Smiddy: So let me get this straight, whatever sinful man decides what is right on earth is automatically accepted in heaven? And whatever shall be loosed on earth by imperfect humans is automatically loosed in heaven? Doesn’t that sound a bit arse about? Or am I missing something here?
I think so, Smiddy. In the scriptures, the Lord has always worked through sinful men who have served as prophets, and through their words, which have been passed on through written languages. When speaking of the office of high priest, the Lord specifically said that “no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.” (See Hebrews 5:4)
Very well, but how was Aaron chosen? Well, take a break and check out Exodus 28 and you tell me. Within all the instructions in that chapter, two things the apostle Paul referred to stand out. First was the calling, which came through Moses, who had the keys of authority. “And take thou unto thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office....” The second was the ordination: “...and [thou[ shalt anoint them, and consecrate them, and sanctify them, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office.” The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has sought neither in establishing its legitimacy. When one becomes an elder, it’s done through a hand shake. You go into a room, you’re informed that you’ve been chosen to be an elder, you shake hands and walk out an elder. I would dearly love to see what the apostles Peter and Paul would think of such a procedure.
Laika: JWs believe baptism is essential for the anointed. Not necessarily for the great crowd, but they would question the salvation of someone who refused to do it.
Again, a doctrine in search of a reference. I don’t often read the Watchtower, but from my reading of the New Testament, baptism is the doorway to salvation. “He who believeth and is baptized shall be saved,” the Lord said. Those who “believe not” (and, consequently, are not baptized) shall be damned.”
Cold Steel, to be honest I don't quite understand where you're going with the rest of your post. Is there a Mormon angle to this that I've missed? How do the Mormons understand baptism and authority?
As far a I know, Laika, only two Christian faiths, or sects, believe in the necessity of the Keys of the Kingdom. One is the Catholic Church, which claims to have the keys by virtue of having them handed down from one pope to the next since the days of Christ. The other is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which claims the keys were restored to the earth through heavenly messengers, specifically, Peter, James and John.
Evangelical and other Protestant movements, including the Jehovah's Witnesses, say the keys are not necessary. This has always puzzled me. Why would Jesus make the statement about the keys if they weren’t necessary? Not to get too far off track, many churches consider themselves, together, to be the “body of Christ.” So it matters not who has the keys as if you’re sincere in your belief in Christ, you’re already bound to Christ in Heaven. (And BTW, you can order a ministerial certificate off the Internet which will allow you to start your own church; and it’s signed by someone else who doesn’t have the keys of authority).
My point is one of administration. How can any sect even claim to constitute Jehovah’s Kingdom on Earth if it lacks these keys? If it baptizes, and their baptisms are not recognized as “bound” in Heaven, and if it disfellowships (excommunicates) a member and doesn’t have the keys of loosing in Heaven or Earth, then why fear being disfellowshiped? To me, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society is very cagey about the way it describes its own power and authority, which is to say, who needs it? Again, that’s why there are no callings and no ordinations in the Outfit. It’s why people can become an elder with a handshake. What happened to the ancient church? How can the Governing Body claim authority which it clearly doesn’t have, and not have keys it claims it doesn’t need, but which were specifically relegated to the ancient church? And since the Governing Body is fond of the metaphor of the faithful and wise servant (or faithful and discreet slave) who is appointed to run the “household of God” and guides members in its directing of doctrines and policies, administers spiritual meat and oversees ordinances of baptism, it’s not unfair to ask them about his master’s keys. For if he doesn’t have them, he is a false claimant who is, actually, a thief and a robber in the master’s house.
To bind in Heaven and Earth is a power necessary for baptisms, for the calling and ordination of church officers like bishops, elders, deacons, teachers, priests, apostles and so forth (which the ancient church had but are conspicuously missing in the WTBTS). That’s why I find it difficult to understand as it relates to baptism.
.
The Keys of the Kingdom was a popular topic for art and can be found in
paintings and statues. Though the keys weren't actually keys, they were
keys of authority. If they are unnecessary to the governance of the church,
why did Jesus refer to them? Yet Protestants (including the WTBTS) see
no reason to possess them; they simply were spiritual relics from a bygone
age...nothing more. Yet, according to Jesus, they had the power to bind
both in Heaven and on Earth..