Posts by Carl

33

Difference Between Catholics and Witnesses

by WTWizard in

i have recently seen one thread about the differences between the witnesses and those other religions.

so i will explain some of my earlier experiences as a catholic and contrast them to the witness experience.. my family was active as a catholic when i was about 6 or so.

we had to salute the flag, and we got to play with other children and go on class trips that also made major markers in life.

Carl_Hernz

And with all respect to 5go’s post, while it may seem that JWs are more logical about their religion than Catholics, that may be just a point of view, based on how one looks at things.

Remember that JWs base their belief on the Bible. Catholicism is not based on the Bible. It is based on the founders of that faith’s encounter with Jesus of Nazareth, and what they believed the events surrounding his life meant; and they see the Bible as based on their religion.

Whereas the Witnesses point to the Bible as the authority for their beliefs, you have to remember that Catholicism did not have such a luxury as the New Testament was yet to be composed, gathered, distributed, etc. Catholicism developed out of an oral tradition that was passed on and eventually written down, some writings which Catholics claim make up the current New Testament.

The Witnesses view the Bible as a book telling people what they should believe, defining all doctrine. Catholics view the Bible as a witness to the truth of its doctrines, but not an exhaustive reference of them all or a treatise on Christian doctrine—they were already an operating religion with many facets by the time it was composed and canonized.

With respect to those who hold to the sola scriptura view, the Witnesses may indeed seem more logical. From the point of view of those who see some value in the way Catholicism developed, the Witnesses don’t make much sense at all.

Regardless of which school of thought you favor, however (and each person’s view should be respected, I believe), I think a religion that makes constant prophetic promises and changes its doctrines so drastically when they don’t come true—smashing many people’s lives in the process—is not the touchstone of what should be considered logical.

33

Difference Between Catholics and Witnesses

by WTWizard in

i have recently seen one thread about the differences between the witnesses and those other religions.

so i will explain some of my earlier experiences as a catholic and contrast them to the witness experience.. my family was active as a catholic when i was about 6 or so.

we had to salute the flag, and we got to play with other children and go on class trips that also made major markers in life.

Carl_Hernz

HI Quandry,

Regarding Saint Nicholas, he was the Archbishop of the See of Myra, the capital of Lycia (Antalya, Trukey today). A strong opponent of Arianism, he was present at the Council of Nicea in 325 CE.

His feast day (marking his victory in death) is celebrated by liturgical churches on December 6. He is invoked as the patron of bakers, pawnbrokers, and children. Due to his characteristic virtue of concern for the poor, legends grew around the telling of his history that inspired the Santa Claus we know today.

While liturgical celebrations of his feast are sometimes connected with Christmas, they are actual part of the celebration of Advent (Christmas is a Twelve Day celebration beginning at sundown on the 24 th of December and ending on sundown of the day of Epiphany —like the song of that title and unlike commercial Christmas which celebrates from Thanksgiving up to December 24 th and then stops).

The current view of the fat and jolly Santa Claus in the red suit comes from secular drawings of him from the 1800s; and while the legend that the advertising genius of the Coca-Cola company was responsible for his current secular state is false, they are mainly responsible for making the now-standardized view of him a mainstay of commercial holiday celebrations.

23

Was the WTS correct?

by chappy in

jw
friends

based on current events, do you think the wts could be at least partially correct on their prediction about organized religion being banned by many governments or even some future un mandate?

what about the western governments (us, britain, france, germany etc)?

think it could or even may happen?

Carl_Hernz

The current friction between religion and the world government extends back to the time of the Enlightenment (the 18 th century) and the subsequent introduction of the ideology of modernism. This time period came with the price of people beginning to feel that religious beliefs were not as trustworthy as once believed, and as a result governments that replaced monarchies often reflected tenets of this sort in their views.

The Witnesses did not come about until the end of the 19 th century, and most of their prophecies are based on viewing things from their own perspective. Also, their description of ‘the waters of Babylon drying up’ are skewed in that while there is a significant drop in recorded attendance in churches in some parts of the world, in others the growth is phenomenal. In the United States, for example, growth in religious organizations is quite significant while current development of the Witnesses has dropped to a stand-still.

So, no, the Witnesses have said anything significant about the future of religion whatsoever. They haven’t shown themselves to be very good at their prophecies.

3

The bible and israel

by jacethespace in

as jehovahs witnesses we were told over and over that jws are gods modern day servants today and jehovahs using us to bring salvation to the world.we were also told that the words israel and jerusalem in prophecy for our day refer to spiritual israel and jerusalem, not fleshly israel.. but does bible prophecy show that?

especially in the old testament.. we know how charles taze russell traveled to israel to try and figure out whether they were gods chosen people still.this is highlighted especially in the jws proclaimers book.and the watchtower believed that israel were still gods people up until the 30s [ if anybody has any info on this and dates please let me know as im not sure when they dropped this belief exactly].charles taze russell in fact sent tracts to israel and the jews telling them that they could look forward to salvation.intresting point is that this was after jesus had apparently give his approvall to the faithfull and discrete slave channel.. zechariah 12:2 says behold i will make jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about.when they shall be in the siege both against jerusalem and against judah.12:3- and in that day will i make jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.. is this prophecy being fullfilled today through literal israel?.

but the most intresting chapter of zechariah is chapter 14 which speaks of the lords day and jesus second coming.it says:.

Carl_Hernz

You will find a wide variety of thought, opinion, and exegesis on this point. While some people may feel quite adamant in regards to their interpretation, most official doctrines on the issue may not be quite as dogmatic. This is due to the fact that Christianity’s theologians generally hold that the prophecies of Israel’s blessings will still come to pass for natural Israel itself.

While mainstream Christianity may view things similarly to the JWs except for a few important differences (in reality JWs and Russell did not invent this view, it is a basic tenet of Christian belief), those differences are significant.

Because the Pauline epistles and the catholic letters of the New Testament make reference to Christians as “Israel,” and the book of Apocalypse uses similar language, from apostolic times to the present Christianity has seen that many of the prophecies referring to Israel as finding a spiritual fulfillment in the body of the Church.

But the main difference from the JWs belief is that most of Christendom also subscribes to the idea that the covenant between God and Abraham, while making it possible for Gentiles to now receive the promises made by the Lord, in no way negates natural Israel from also receiving those promises eventually as well. Exactly when and how these promises will be fulfilled is where you will get the wide variety of different responses, yet at least this much is generally agreed upon in Christian theology outside of the JWs.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that natural Israel is entitled to any of these things, however. They do not believe in a catholic salvation (meaning “all peoples included,” not any reference to the Roman Catholic Church). That is the main difference: JWs believe that only they will receive God’s promises. Mainstream Christianity believes that a lack of faithfulness on behalf of the Jews has never negated any of God’s promises in the past for Israel, and neither will it now in reference to belief in Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah.

Footnote: While the JWs claim that they are all inclusive by means of having people of all races within their religion, the salvation described in the catholic letters of the New Testament point to all peoples being saved without limit to our current understanding of divisions and separation as exist in the world today.

28

"Let There Be Light"

by ElderChild in

and the messiah testified that .

his god and father(creator) is the god and .

creation of god(he who is the only true god .

Carl_Hernz

I don't like to call people "trolls," but I guess one has to...

Troll Message is an outrageous message posted to a message board, newsgroup or mailing list to bait people to answer.

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" or "Message Board Troll" is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. Forum Troll delights in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war.

Next time you are on a message board and you see a post by somebody whom you think is a troll, and you feel you must reply, simply write a follow-up message entitled "Troll Alert" and type only this:The only way to deal with trolls is to limit your reaction and not to respond to trolling messages. It is well known that most people don't read messages that nobody responds to, while 99% of forum visitors first read the longest and the largest threads with the most answers.

--From "Netiquette Guidelines"

Signed, Carlos, the evil one or whatever this ElderChild, light of the world, said

28

"Let There Be Light"

by ElderChild in

and the messiah testified that .

his god and father(creator) is the god and .

creation of god(he who is the only true god .

Carl_Hernz

I think I understand what you're saying now. "Messiah" according to what you are saying is someone other than the historical Jesus of Nazareth.

While there is question among religious and nonreligious people regarding who Jesus of Nazareth was, he is not a fictional character invented by Christendom. But I gather you are not saying that; am I correct in saying that you believe that this person has wrongly been identified as the promised anointed one of the Davidic dynasty? Or are you saying that the pronunciation in English of this individual's name is incorrect or a mere invention of the whim of people you consider false teachers?

I was brought up speaking two languages, Spanish and English, Spanish being my mother tongue. At the age of 40 I now have a very good working knowledge of some 10 languages, including the ancient tongues of the Hebrew people and the first century Christians. So excuse me if I say that your statements are still cryptic, because it is not clear how you are using the term "Messiah."

When someone uses that term, I think of it in the Hebrew sense and not in the way some English speakers do. Perhaps this may be where I fail in my use of American English being of Spanish descent. I do know that some English speakers sometimes use it to mean "savior," or "special one." Others mean it to express a union with God himself.

So are you saying that God, the Creator, was the person anointed as the promised one of the Davidic dynasty? Or are you using the term Messiah without any reference to its Jewish origins? This is where you sound confusing, because the term "anointed" means "the person designated to rule."

You may be a "newbie" just like me, and because I am a newbie I cannot speak for everyone else, but you do not show any signs of being able to explain yourself, a desire to help inform people, or the ability to communicate what you view as precious truth in any reasonable form. What does your topic have to do with this being a Jehovah's Witness discussion forum? Are you just trying to preach to us? If you really had something important to say about God you are going about it the wrong way.

I don't mean to be insulting, but if you just want to get a message out that others need to hear, wouldn't a billboard be better than a closed Internet discussion board?

35

I am confused!

by spiritboi in

i am from a se asia country.

was not long in the truth.

only 3 years.

Carl_Hernz

Are you speaking in Jehovah's Witness terms when you say you are possessed? JWs believe all spirit activity is under direction of the demons since the death of the apostles. Or are you claiming to have charismatic gifts or charisms via some form of mysticism associated with a religion like a branch of Christianity?

The JW belief that all "miracles" after the time of the apostles come from demons cannot be substantiated via apologetic testing (meaning their doctrine regarding spiritual gifts doesn't hold water). However even the greatest believers in "gifts of the spirit" like Penecostals, Christian charismatics, and the Roman Catholic Church are quite skeptical of such events. Most of these organizations have investigators that include people from all branches of biological science to study such claims of miracles and often, as is usually the case with the Catholics especially, it may take centuries before any of these events or healers are ever recognized as authentic...centuries!

Where certain individuals in history (and there have been very few) have been recognized for having "miraculous" abilities by some of these groups, they generally all had the trait of not drawing any attention to themselves. They also didn't search out to be studied by anyone nor did any of them feel the need to speak out to a group to ask questions regarding their abilities. With their gifts these historical people just went about their daily routines with the knowledge of how to use their gifts without stirring controversy, debate, or question. Whenever any of these things did arise, history shows it was not started by any of these charismatics.

If you belong to a religious group, Christian or non-Christian, you should go to those with authority in your group and privately discuss the matter with them. If you don't have such an affiliation, you should at least have the knowledge that there are differing opinions in this group, and announcing you have charisms of some sort will not help you if you are look for definitive conclusions. In fact you might bring hurt into this group by stirring up controversy.

While I give you the benefit of the doubt, I would not bring up the subject unless it is of the utmost importance. The reason is that history is filled with people who have made such claims about themselves that have proven false, and in these cases these individuals enjoyed the attention the were receiving. Authentic "mystics" (Francis of Assissi is one after the time of the apostles that is recognized by most Catholics and Protestants) have done the opposite of what you have done. So if your gifts are authentic and beneficial, for the sake of those you might be able to help, stop talking about it or else people will think you are just fooling us and looking for attention.

And if you think you are really possessed by a demon or evil spirits, then why are you asking an Internet board group to give you a diagnosis? Contact an exorcist or someone else who specializes in that stuff, please!

28

"Let There Be Light"

by ElderChild in

and the messiah testified that .

his god and father(creator) is the god and .

creation of god(he who is the only true god .

Carl_Hernz

While I am not too sure what ElderChild is getting at (and forgive me, ElderChild, but your writing is very cryptic), I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt that no harm is meant.

However, ElderChild, be aware that I think we are in the presence of some very logical thinkers on this board, and one thing you need to be very careful about is that people could take offense at what might appear as ranting by you on this board. I know that is not your intention, as I am sure you have nothing but the greatest desire to build everyone up around you, including opposers.

It appears you feel you have an important message to post and get across. So if I may be so bold, perhaps you can try again by writing in a way that we, as your audience, can fully appreciate you and the points you are making. I don't think many of us understand your point. Just think of us as a child that doesn't like certain nutritious foods, so you as the cook need to prepare them in a way that we can eat them. In other words, write at a level that ministers to us for our benefit, as I am sure that is why you are writing. While your style likely means a lot to you, it is unfortunately lost on us.

"Be all things to all people," as the apostle wrote, and perhaps using a style that might be foreign to you, attempt at writing in a way that inspires discussion so we are uplifted by your words instead of confused or maybe, in the minds of some, left feeling like you are trying to preach down at us. Again I am sure your intentions, however, are only the best for us.

28

"Let There Be Light"

by ElderChild in

and the messiah testified that .

his god and father(creator) is the god and .

creation of god(he who is the only true god .

Carl_Hernz

The description of God as a three-headed or three-bodied entity is actually one of those things promoted by the Watchtower Society as a red herring used in its stand against the Trinity. While there is artwork that uses such imagery in regards to the Trinity, such imagery and the Watchtower description of it has very little to do with the actual doctrine.

One thing I fret is that people take so much of what the Watchtower has taught them and still cling to it as accurate, even after they have left the organization. Whether people who leave the Watchtower eventually adopt belief in the Trinity or do not (everyone should make up their own minds and treated with respect whatever position they choose), as a religious historian I must protest the way Jehovah’s Witnesses have misrepresented the Trinity teaching. Though I am not going to here promote or advocate such a doctrine, I should point out that what JWs say about it and what citations and quotes they print are very incomplete and misleading.

Religions that believe in the Trinity have a concept of three persons making up one God, similar as to how Genesis describes a man and a wife making one flesh or how parents and their children make up one family unit. In the same way that the human mind cannot conceive that God had no beginning, Trinitarians also believe it is the same regarding this teaching, that it is a “truth” that cannot be fully explained in human terms.

From a strict apologetic approach, the reasoning used by Jehovah’s Witnesses in their refutation of the Trinity doctrine consists of a misrepresentation of a basic tenet of this teaching, namely that it defies explanation. To therefore argue that the doctrine is confusing or doesn’t make sense or isn’t found directly in Scripture is moot; Trinitarians also agree to the same things.

This approach is referred to as the “straw man” technique. Here the Witnesses teach that they have the “truth” because they can prove that the Trinity defies human reasoning. When the Witnesses prove that the doctrine defies human reasoning they claim this as an earmark that they have the “truth,” when in reality they have just argued in support of the Trinitarian’s claim that the Trinity defies human reasoning.

To the unsuspecting lay person who never learned the basics regarding historical Christian development and the Trinity doctrine, the Witnesses look impressive as they do this trick. But in reality they’ve just knocked over a “straw man,” a moot argument that proves nothing but the exact same thing Trinitarians believe.

Again, please don't misconstrue this as a declaration of my personal beliefs or a promotion of the Trinity, but after reading many of the comments on here for some years before I finally began posting recently, one thing I have noticed, even in myself, is that the insidious techniques of programming the Witnesses employ often do not get entirely unlearned, and this often leaves people still misunderstanding many things in the world, especially in the world of religion.

33

Refute anti-gay Bible verses

by cloudblue in

anyone done some research to refute the handful of anti-gay verses in the bible?

i've done a bit of research on the net.

i don't have the links handy, but most of them centered around the assertion that the original words in those passages were mis-translated.

Carl_Hernz

I have had the same experience you are talking about because when I left the Watchtower organization I began to wonder about my sexuality. I even got involved with what is called an "open and affirming" church that teaches some of the things you mentioned. I learned of their beliefs which come from a religious ideology they call Queer Theology--and their main argument is, as you mentioned, teaching that the original words in the Bible are mistranslated.

I'm a professional writer on Bible subjects and theology. After 7 years of studying this theology as well as working to incorporate it into my life (I came to realize my sexual orientation wasn't at issue as much as sexual repression was), I discovered that the arguments presented by Queer Theology, though well-meaning, are not accurate or can be proven incorrect under apologetic testing (using the scientific method to prove the reasoning in the arguments).

I have been a bit worried for my friends in the GLBT community (and I have an older brother who is actively gay) not so much that they are living lifestyles contrary to Scripture but that many of them are basing their lives on the tenets of Queer Theology which is academically wanting. Queer Theology has been around for a while, is studied at universities around the world, but it's scholarship is sloppy and sometimes outright lacking and ignorant of history. I believe that those in the GLBT community deserve a rethinking of this theology because for the most part I think it does them a disservice and that they, like anyone else, deserve authentic scholarly work to espouse their beliefs instead of the current network which is not so much scholastic as it is political (and that is where the main problem lies).

If you want more information on their arguments and how they stand up to apologetic testing (too much information that can be provided here), I can send you information from a book of mine that is in the final stages prior to publishing. I have a few chapters in it that cover their arguments and compare them to Scripture, as well as put them to the test. I can't make a link to this work because it doesn't exist anywhere on the Net or is on the market yet, but I can send what early previewers got to see that covers all of this if you are interested.

Carl_Hernz

Posts by Carl_Hernz