Posts by Cold Steel

3

A knock-down argument against the WBTS interpretation of Daniel 7:13,14 to support 1914!

by yadda yadda 2 in

the watchtower society still officially teaches that daniel 2:44 is fulfilled in the future at armageddon while in the same breath asserting that daniel 7:13,14 was fulfilled in 1914. note the following paragraphs from chapter 10 of the "worship god" book, recently studied by all jehovah's witnesses:.

"3. learning about god's kingdom is of the greatest urgency now, as soon that kingdom will take action to change forever the rulership of this earth.

daniel 2:44 foretells: "in the days of those kings [governments now ruling] the god of heaven will set up a kingdom [in heaven] that will never be brought to ruin.

Cold Steel

When anyone quotes the New World Translation, I just cringe. The JW interpretation of scripture is bad enough, but it's like a group of Boy Scouts with a Hebrew-Greek-Aramaic lexicon translating the entire Bible. Even if I were a dedicated believer in the Society, the first thing I'd do is toss that abomination in the trash and use a respected and accurate translation!

Regarding the establishment of Yahweh's Kingdom in the last days, the Green Dragon "translates" it (as it appears above):

In the days of those kings [governments now ruling]the God of heaven will set up a kingdom [in heaven] that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people [humans will never again rule the earth]. It will crush and put an end to all these [present] kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite.

First, in the "days of those kings" refers to the individual nations that sprang up followed the fall of Rome. One can stretch it to our days if one wishes, but the period of time spans from about 1830 to our present time and presumably beyond. Next, it will be established by God and not man. In fact, the New International Version puts it this way:

In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever.

One wonders why the translators of the Green Dragon uses the terms "never be brought to ruin" instead of "never be destroyed" as most other versions state. The original language actually uses the word "destroyed" and not "brought to ruin." True, "ruin" means "total destruction or disintigration," but "destroy" means to "tear down or break up, demolish." But the NWT states the kingdom would not be "brought to ruin." It's once removed in meaning from what it actually says. After that, the NWT says the kingdom will "not be passed on to any other people." But the original language doesn't say this. It says that it will not be "left to another people." In other words, the kingdom will not be run by "another people." Using the term "passed on" to any other people implies a transition of the kingdom that the original language doesn't say. Literally, the text states: "and its kingdom to another people is not left." The term "left" in this case is defined, "To cause or allow to be or remain in a specified state." This is completely different from being "passed on," which implies a "change" in remaining in a specified state. Finally, the NWT states that the kingdom will "stand to times indefinite." Literally, the text states, "standeth to an age," which is a way of saying "forever" or "without end." But "indefinite" means "unclear" or "vague"—without precise limits.

Let the readers compare the versions, but it's clear the translators of the Green Dragon have agendas in their "translations." If one cannot add or delete from the scriptures, can one change its meaning? How can the scriptures mean that humans no longer will rule the earth by this scripture? It may be true, but that's not what the scriptures say. And while these are parenthetical interpretations of scripture, the governments of God throughout the millennia have always included humans. And when Jesus becomes the King of Earth, it's not reasonable to think he will micromanage every detail of government. Wasn't the whole idea that the saints would reign with Christ?

It's not clear what the Society believes the Kingdom is. When Jesus returns, will he establish a kingdom or will he use the WBTS government now in existence? And when Daniel writes that "in the days of those kings," does he mean a future event or a past event? In short, is the Society that Kingdom or will Yahweh establish another kingdom?

--------------------------

What does Psalm 110:1-2 with 1914? And how does the Society know the Ancient of Days is "Jehovah God"? The Father God already has conferred "rulership and dignity and kingdom" upon Jesus after the fall of mankind, when he was made intercessor. Finally, why do the NWT translators insist on translating "everlasting" into "indefinitely lasting"? The first and most popular definition of "everlasting" is "eternal" or "neverending." Only the second definition refers to "continuing indefinitely or for a long period of time." If Daniel had meant "indefinitely" rather than "eternal," why didn't he say so?

34

Jehovah's Witnesses: Who's Your Mediator?

by Darth Rutherford in

is jesus your mediator?

were these men anointed christians?

... jesus christ, is not the mediator between jehovah god and all mankind.

Cold Steel

Another thing they miss is that the Father appointed Yahweh as the Intercessor between Himself and man. JWs have never understood that Jesus was the great I AM, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Methodist scholar Dr. Margaret Barker has written extensively on the ancient views of the Israelites regarding Yahweh and she notes that Jehovah was the son of El (Eloah or plural, Elohim). He was not the Father God, but a son of the Father God. This makes sense when one considers that if the Father dealt with prophets "face to face" as with Moses, there would have been no Intercessor. Barker's hypothesis is that Elohim is the "Most High God" and that Jehovah was considered one of his sons. There were 70 Sons that ruled the 70 nations, and Jehovah was the "God of Israel." Jesus' insistance that he was Jehovah is the claim that the Jews of his day considered most blasphemous. To claim to be the Messiah was one thing, but the Jews failed to understand the beliefs of their fathers, or to understand that his name would be "the Mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace." (Isa. 9:6)

In this case, Jesus is not identified with the Father God, but the Father of the Nation, the Father of the Patriarchs, and the Father of Salvation. Potentates such as kings and the Roman Emporer (and later the popes) all were called "Father" or "Holy Father." And in the United States, we refer to the "founding fathers" and, in the case of Abraham Lincoln, "Father Abraham." Since Jesus is the King of Kings and the Lords of Lords, the Beginning and the End, he is rightfully called the "everlasting Father." So while he wasn't the Father he spoke of, he was "the Mighty God" and Immanuel means, "God with us."

This does not mean that because man has an intercessor, that God cannot also call prophets and apostles. Yahweh was man's intercessor in the days of the great exodus, and as one scholar noted:

As Moses recounted the events that occurred on Mount Sinai, he reiterated God's anger and displeasure over the Israelites' disobedience (Exodus 9:18–20, 22–23). At that time, Moses, as a type of Christ, interceded for the Israelites and through much prayer (forty days and nights according to the text–9:25), saved them from destruction (10:10).

And when Jesus rose from the dead, he gave Peter and the other apostles the Keys of the Kingdom, and did not disband the apostles. If the Governing Body wants to claim to be latter-day apostles ("sent ones"), they can. But they cannot rob the role and title of intercessor from Jesus/Yahweh. Jesus will remain the intercessor until the end of the Millennium, and following the final judgment and the final resurrection of man, and the glorification of the earth, he will present the earth to the Father and it will join His other creations, which number more than the grains of sand on the shore.

10

Never discuss politics and religion in polite company, WHY.

by jam in

i think we handle this pretty good here.

are not able to see the expression on ones face or sense.

ones blood boiling while discussing these topics.

Cold Steel

I've never much cared what people want to talk about as long as it's fit for polite company. Back in the 1800s, before there were radios or televisions, people talked about politics and religion, often without resorting to violence.

In the South, where we were all Methodists, quite often during "dinner" (dinner was at noon, and supper, a lighter meal, was at about 6 p.m., give or take a half hour), we would discuss what we'd heard in church and we commented and critiqued the pastor's sermon. We had lively conversations about how many persons were in the Trinity, whether they were physically one or three separate beings. The pastor seemed to feel that God was one, but manifested himself in three different ways. We didn't much agree with that, but thankfully, no one disfellowshiped us for disagreeing with the pastor! We also talked politics, but mostly we agreed on conservative family values. One big controversy was whether the Democrats had outlived their usefullness as a party and whether folks should split away from it and become Republicans. After all, it was the great Al Smith who declared the party had been betrayed by socialists, communists and fellow travelers.

This was back in the mid- to late- 60s. NONE DARE CALL IT TREASON was a bestselling book that convinced many of us that our way of life was under attack, and that there were those in government who wanted our youth to be bereft of religion, patriotism, virtue, integrity, education and intelligence—you know, like they are now. Such were sowing the seeds of destruction in the body politic and turning makers into takers. And as Karl Marx said, the best way to destroy a nation is to debauch its currency. All the old folks were still steamed over Truman firing MacArthur and that the Vietnam conflict was the very embodiment of Truman's foolish, inept and gullible globalist policies.

Other than that, we didn't much discuss much. We let in Jehovah's Witnesses, and my grandfather used to walk across the street and attend something called a "Kingdom Hall," since there were no other churches in walking distance. Although he enjoyed himself, he often came back shaking his head at some of their doctrines. He knew the Bible well and he was pretty sure they didn't.

Nowadays, when visiting my wife's socialist aunt, I just keep my Teaparty views to myself unless she asks me, then I'll state my view matter of factly. She now swears I've led away my wife into outer darkness.

110

Anthony Morris The 3rd Talks About Human Hot Dogs At Armageddon, There Will Be No Picnic For Survivors

by frankiespeakin in

watch out for armageddon it is going to be numbing to human sensibilities:.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=micq4iqrklm.

i guess he's thinkin jehovah's gonna roast them like a hot dogs burned to a charred ruination over a fire.

Cold Steel

Ah, yeah. Just scrape up some of your neighbors and
have 'em over fer' dinner!

38

I went to the DC!!!!

by DATA-DOG in

it sucked.

the co said that the term, " the truth " means " truthful understanding of the scriptures.

" he also said that the truth does not change.

Cold Steel

Badges? Badges?? They don't need no stinking badges!

38

I went to the DC!!!!

by DATA-DOG in

it sucked.

the co said that the term, " the truth " means " truthful understanding of the scriptures.

" he also said that the truth does not change.

Cold Steel

Yeah, they cover their tracks and tell you don't google "Jehovah's Witness"...

Really? How do they tell you not to do things like this? Is it just council or what?

There isn't one person in the history of all mankind that has ever not died.

Well, I've never died...not yet. And biblically, there are some who are reputed to have not died:

1. Enoch: Taken into heaven prior to the great flood.

2. Moses: Joshua said Moses died, but no one saw the body. Later, Satan was said to have entered
into a contest with Michael over the "body" of Moses. Was the contest over Moses' translation?

3. Elijah: Taken into a fiery chariot, he is reputed to be taken into heaven. Prophecy states that he will
return before the great and dreadfjul day of the Lord.

4. John: The apostles got into a snit because the word was getting around that John had been promised
life until Jesus' Second Coming. But Jesus reminded them that he never said John wouldn't die,
only that if he willed John to "tarry" on Earth to that time, what was that to them?

9

Believing in Two Gods

by NeverKnew in

i'm trying to come up with "dumb householder" queries for if i'm ever graced with another door-knocking jw.. if i were to say, "are you the ones who believe in 2 gods," (in reference to christ being "a god" in john 1:1) would i get an answer other than "no"?

i'm not asking what my response subsequent to the answer should be.

i'm cheating and asking what they'll tell me off the tops of their heads since surely they've been asked this before.. .

Cold Steel

That's an argument most Christians can't win.

How many gods are there in the Universe? How many make up "God"?

We know that the Father is God,
The Son is God, and,
The Holy Spirit is God

It's like asking how many people are in a family? Or, how many people are in a quorum?

God (Elohim being plural) isn't physically ONE God. It can be three gods, five gods, five hundred, five thousand or five million. There's no set limit.

Jesus prayed to the Father concerning the apostles, "...that THEY may be ONE, even as WE are ONE."

This clearly means that in the same way WE are ONE, Father, THEY should be ONE. Does this mean that they should be physically ONE? Not at all. In fact, the apostle John makes it fairly clear that those who become co-heirs with Christ become ONE with God. That means that as children of God, we can become like our Heavenly Father and like Jesus Christ.

It's a doctrine called theosis.

“ I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. ” (Psalm 82:6)

43

The TOPIC which may never be discussed!

by Terry in

question: how does the leadership of jehovah's witnesses instruct its members to prepare for the eventual elder care of its members?.

answer: it pretends it will never happen!.

is this responsible leadership or some kind of cognitive dissonant malfeasance?.

Cold Steel

This is incredible news, and it makes me sick to think how they're ignoring this problem. Our seniors have done so much for us, now we're to abandon them because the JWs believe Armageddon is right around the corner. It is, but it isn't. World events are quickly taking us to the last great battle of our time, but Gog, the Beast, Antichrist, whatever you want to call him, has not manifested himself. The temple has not been built by the Jews (Rev. 11), the tribulation has not even begun, nor have the two prophets been called who will use God's power to stay the enemy's hand. Many things need to take place before the return of the Savior/Jehovah (see Zechariah 12-14, Ezekiel 37-38).

And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.
And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.
These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will. And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves. And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth. And after three days and an half the spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them. And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them. And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.

The Jehovah's Witness exegesis experts, not liking things like the above, simply ignore it! A child could explain this prophecy because it tells us who, what, why and where. Just not when. And what's really ironic is that this is the great battle of Armageddon that the JWs claim to be waiting for. Jesus wasn't crucified in New York, London, Rome, Athens or Paducah! He was crucified in Jerusalem.

Back in the early 70s, I recall the JWs were expecting Armageddon to happen at any moment. There may be a bit of perverse justice in that many of the JWs at the time weren't lifting a finger for their futures or their childrens' futures. Now they're the seniors who have few, if anyone at all, to care for them. And even if their kids wanted to, they're too busy flipping burgers at McDonald's because their parents and grandparents didn't provide for their educations. What goes around comes around. Ask any Witness today to explain Armageddon and none of them has a clue. I have an entire Watchtower entitled ARMAGEDDON!! on the cover, and I didn't know any more about it after I read it than before. Yahweh gave us prophecies so we would know the times and the seasons, and when his coming was nigh. But the folks making the horrendous decisions about the future will soon enough find themselves senior citizens with no one to take care of them.

And who will they blame?

165

Do Animals Have Souls?

by Cold Steel in

i know most jehovah's witnesses believe in the soul sleeping doctrine.

by this, given that neither man nor beast has a spirit, but that they do possess souls (or "intelligences" unique to themselves).

where this intelligence resides between death and resurrection is more than a passing interest, but again, assuming that yehweh can recreate one's distict soul, does the society believe that animals have souls?

Cold Steel

I think this discussion has gotten a little bit out of control. First, it has NOTHING to do with Mormonism. Just because I happen to be one doesn't mean a thing. It doesn't mean I'm trying to convert anyone to my beliefs (since I've believed animals have spirits long before I was a Mormon).

It also doesn't mean that animals or human have spirits, souls, whatever you want to call it. Originally, I was going to title this thread, "Do YOU Believe Animals Have Spirits?" and subsequently decided to delete the words "YOU" and "Believe" for clarity and brevity. I also intended for the thread to be lighter in nature and not so datgum dogmatic.

Who among us can definitively say whether animals or humans have spirits, anyway? There's no way to prove it scientifically or theologically. I just wanted your opinions. Someone asked me what Mormon beliefs were regarding the matter and I replied; however, as someone else pointed out, it's completely moot as the correctness of Mormonism means very little in a discussion of non-Mormons. Quoting Mormon scripture or Mormon authorities would gain me nothing, which is to say that our opinions and views have no more merit than anyone elses.

I have an evangelical friend who believes that while humans have spirits, animals were created for man's use, to be used as companions, transportation, defense and food. After we're resurrected, humans will have no need of these things, and so they will blink out and we'll get over it as we keep developing.

Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in spirits, but they believe in a "soul" -- that is, intelligence and self-awareness. When we die, it's like flipping off a light switch. Later, Jehovah God will switch back on all the lights in a process they call resurrection. But he won't turn on the lights of animals. With the wicked, he will flip on their lights, judge them and flip them off again.

Then there are my atheist friends who declare that neither animals nor humans have "souls" or spirits. They point out there's no evidence at all that anyone or anything has a spirit, and further, that when people or animals die, there is no change in a body's weight. That said, just a few years ago, no one really was able to comprehend quantum physics. Scientists have been able to create anti-matter and have found certain particles that can exist simultaneously in different "universes" or deminsions. When I was born in 1953, none of this was on the table. And dark matter also was unheard of. So just because scientists have no evidence NOW of spirits doesn't prove anything. Of course the burden of proof is upon believers, not science, and is a matter of faith.

165

Do Animals Have Souls?

by Cold Steel in

i know most jehovah's witnesses believe in the soul sleeping doctrine.

by this, given that neither man nor beast has a spirit, but that they do possess souls (or "intelligences" unique to themselves).

where this intelligence resides between death and resurrection is more than a passing interest, but again, assuming that yehweh can recreate one's distict soul, does the society believe that animals have souls?

Cold Steel

LisaRose: Pretty pictures of cats do not substitute for a serious discussion. I no longer believe in what I was taught by a fraudulent faith from a mythical book and therefore I must also reject such fanciful notions as souls, spirits and ghosts.

You’re right. Photos mean nothing. Our discussions also ultimately mean nothing, as this is just a thread of personal opinions. Nothing in the Bible (“mythical book”) tells us one way or the other whether animals have spirits. And even if it did, many people (like you) who wouldn’t accept it. In my view...opinion...belief, souls, or intelligence, is eternal, having no beginning or end. As one of my professors pointed out, if you take your hand and put it on the top of your head, “that’s above you.” If you then put your hand on your nose, “that’s under, or below, you.” Still using your hand, you can map out “you” very simply. Obviously, it’s your brain, and all ancient cultures realized it. There’s nothing profound in this observation, but still, whether the brain is the depository of what defines YOU, or whether it simply houses your intelligence, that’s the issue.

Cofty: The question of conscious existence after death is a scientific question. Supernatural claims can be tested in a controlled environment and proven to be false. The idea of animals surviving death is just wishful thinking. Where do you draw the line? Horses, dogs, fish, birds, insects, bacteria?

I don’t draw a line, neither do I believe the existence of spirits and ghosts, and near death experiences, can be proven one way or the other. I’ve had personal experiences that have proven these things to my satisfaction. There are genuinely haunted places all over the world, and people who are genuinely possessed by evil spirits. Many people won’t agree that such is the case, and they’re entitled to their opinion. I’d love to take folks who are unbelievers like you into any one of a number of abandoned asylums, where people were horribly abused. I think I could change your mind in short order. I had a close friend who lived in a troubled house. It was very old, and the things he and his family experienced were frightening. They would hear footsteps on the floor above them, once or twice followed by a terrible crashing sound, as though someone had pushed over a dresser with the drawers full. When they went upstairs to inspect what happened, nothing would be out of place. At night, he said, light would sometimes appear on the wall, looking very much like car lights from outside. The strange thing about it, he added, is that if you held your hand up over the light to see where it was coming from, there would be no shadow. Apparently you could wave your hand in front of the lit wall and there would be no shadow. I never experienced these things personally, but I knew my friend’s character and he was an impeccably honest chap. His mother and father also backed up his stories, and they impressed me as also being honest folks.

Qcmbr: Please check PM.