Posts by jonathan dough

28

June 1st public WT - Does God Have an Organization?

by LostGeneration in

anyone read this yet?

more of the same cheerleading and self-worship of the jw organization.. on page 14, they even pull a few quotes from the bible, but not their own!

that of course is because when freddy was writing his version of the bible, he forgot to put "organization" into the text, so now they pull a few quotes from these sources to justify worship of "organization!.

jonathan dough

Even if He did, it wouldn't be the WBTS due to their occult roots.

The documented historical connection with the occult is evident in several ways. Russell relied heavily on astrological predictions and signs of the zodiac. Rutherford believed that Jehovah most likely resided in the Pleiades constellation. Many of Rutherford and Russell's false predictions were calculated based on alignment and measurement of ancient Egyptian pyramids relying in essence on the powers of the occult. A small pyramid was erected next to Russell's grave as a memorial to his life and work. The satanic All-Seeing Eye of occult worship adorns Russell's memorial pyramid, and early Watchtower publications incorporate Masonic symbolism to a great degree. Furthermore, the Divine Plan of the Ages, an early Watchtower book, is adorned with the Winged Sun Disc, an Egyptian religious symbol of pagan origins and false worship.

The Jehovahs Witnesses can run from their occult past, but they can't hide. Nor can they sweep these truths under the rug of their New Light Doctrine. Due to such an un-biblical foundation that continued well into the 1920s, it is inconceivable that Jesus Christ chose the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society as their sole representatives on earth due to the purity of their faith.

http://www.144000.110mb.com/directory/occult_jehovahs_witnesses.html

22

John 1:1

by Ding in

most the nwt translates john 1:1 as "... and the word was a god," not "...and the word was god.".

the reason they give is that the word theos doesn't have the definite article in front of it in the greek.. in his 1982 book, "the jehovah's witness' new testament," greek scholar robert countess looked up all such occurrences in the nt (theos without the definite article) and checked the nwt.. he discovered that the wts only followed their stated rule 6% of the time.. 94% of the time, they translated it "god" anyway!.

jonathan dough

I think most scholars would agree that that rendering, at least in terms of Greek of the time, would create theological problems, as it could be

interpreted to mean that 'ho theos' (God the Father) and the Word ('logos') were the same person, literally. This would be Sabellianism, which was

always a heresy.

I think you are confusing immanent trinity versus economic trinity. This will clear that up: http://www.144000.110mb.com/trinity/index.html#2

Sabellianism has no place in this argument because John 1:1 is not speaking of Jesus. Furthermore, Orthodox Christians - the overwhelming majority of Catholic and Protestant churches - teach that: “The humanity of Christ is a creature, it is not God” (Catholic Encyclopedia, 922).

The second God referred to at John 1:1 is God the Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. In that sense it is not unreasonable to conclude that the first person of the trinity, God the Father, was with the Son, the second person. God the Son was with God the Father, in terms of their relative distinctions, inseparable as they ultimately comprise one God.

22

John 1:1

by Ding in

most the nwt translates john 1:1 as "... and the word was a god," not "...and the word was god.".

the reason they give is that the word theos doesn't have the definite article in front of it in the greek.. in his 1982 book, "the jehovah's witness' new testament," greek scholar robert countess looked up all such occurrences in the nt (theos without the definite article) and checked the nwt.. he discovered that the wts only followed their stated rule 6% of the time.. 94% of the time, they translated it "god" anyway!.

jonathan dough

Whether John 1:1 should read "was a god" or "was God" should be the end of the argument, not the beginning. First, examine all of the evidence as to whether the Word was, and is, God, which the Word was, and is, and based upon that context and supporting grammatical constructs one must come to the inevitable conclusion that the Word was God, in the proper trinitarian context. Here is the proof for that: http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index-5.html#20

The JWs even agree with this context-based analytical approach because they can't win the grammatical argument outright.

The Jehovah's Witnesses base their interpretation “the Word was a god” on a) rules of grammar, and b) the overall context of the Bible. Basically, they argue that even though a literal translation does not include the indefinite article “a” before God, it can and should be inserted, depending upon the context (Should You Believe, Chapter 9), even though a literal Greek rendering is “and God was the Word” or in English “and the Word was God,” (ibid., Chapter 10; Reasoning, 416, 417).

Strong and Vine’s vehemently disagrees with this grammatical assessment.

(4) Theos is used (4a) with the definite article, (4b) without (i.e., as an anarthrous noun). (4c) The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Acts 27:23 (“of [the] God whose I am,”) the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse (ho theos) we in English do not need the article, (4c) John 1:1 As to this latter it is usual to employ the article with a proper name, when mentioned a second time. (4c) There are, of course, exceptions to this, as when the absence of the article serves to lay stress upon, or give precision to, the character or nature of what is expressed in the noun.
(4c1) A notable instance of this is in Jn 1:1, “and the Word was God”; here a double stress is on theos by the absence of the article and by the emphatic position. To translate it literally, “a god was the Word” is entirely misleading. Moreover, that “the Word” is the subject of the sentence, exemplifies the rule that the subject is to be determined by its having the article when the predicate is amorphous (without the article).

In other words, the absence of “a” in “a god” lays a double stress on and emphasizes theos so that it should read “God,” ie., “and the Word was God.”

http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index-7.html#37

26

is getting a blood transfusion in itself a DF offense?

by oompa in

jw
friends

i know if you join the military it is considered that you have dissassociated yourself...but if you are in an accident and are given blood when you are unconcious...is that in itself reason for df?

or what if you willingly accepted a blood transfusion?

what if you do not show remorse or repentance or even refuse to meet with the elders?

jonathan dough

i might could drag it out and make them bleed money

Not something you want to admit to. Also, if there is litigation they can make you produce every comment posted here.

As for grounds, or possible causes of action, the JWs are very vulnerable. They just haven't met their match, yet. Even in the USA, there are limitations to what they can do. Their religious rights are not absolute. Just don't stumble in. They will make you bleed money.

55

The Watchtower, a cult that worships the FDS and GB!

by VM44 in

with the continual emphasis that the watchtower places on following and trusting the fds and the gb in particular, one can only come to the following conclusion:.

the watchtower (and the jehovah's witnesses) are followers of a cult that worships the fds and the gb!.

essentially everything in the bible refers to the fds/gb.. everyone must listen to and follow what the gb says.. everyone must consume the "rich spiritual food" provided by the fds and the gb!.

jonathan dough

Trace their roots back and what do you find? How could it have evolved into a cult?

http://www.144000.110mb.com/directory/occult_jehovahs_witnesses.html

Try as the Jehovah's Witnesses do, there is no escaping their occult pagan past. Potential converts are forewarned and are advised to study these issues carefully. Below are numerous websites devoted to exposing the Jehovah's Witnesses' deep connection with the occult and its pagan origins.

This documented historical connection with the occult is evident in several ways. Russell relied heavily on astrological predictions and signs of the zodiac. Rutherford believed that Jehovah most likely resided in the Pleiades constellation. Many of Rutherford and Russell's false predictions were calculated based on alignment and measurement of ancient Egyptian pyramids relying in essence on the powers of the occult. A small pyramid was erected next to Russell's grave as a memorial to his life and work. The satanic All-Seeing Eye of occult worship adorns Russell's memorial pyramid, and early Watchtower publications incorporate Masonic symbolism to a great degree. Furthermore, the Divine Plan of the Ages, an early Watchtower book, is adorned with the Winged Sun Disc, an Egyptian religious symbol of pagan origins and false worship.

The Jehovahs Witnesses can run from their occult past, but they can't hide. Nor can they sweep these truths under the rug of their New Light Doctrine. Due to such an un-biblical foundation that continued well into the 1920s, it is inconceivable that Jesus Christ chose the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society as their sole representatives on earth due to the purity of their faith.

26

is getting a blood transfusion in itself a DF offense?

by oompa in

jw
friends

i know if you join the military it is considered that you have dissassociated yourself...but if you are in an accident and are given blood when you are unconcious...is that in itself reason for df?

or what if you willingly accepted a blood transfusion?

what if you do not show remorse or repentance or even refuse to meet with the elders?

jonathan dough

http://www.144000.110mb.com/directory/jehovahs_witnesses_beliefs_blood_transfusions.html

The Jehovah's Witnesses' beliefs regarding the prohibition of blood transfusions becomes all the more heinous when it comes to young children, many of whom have died in furtherance of their parents' misguided beliefs. The blood transfusion prohibition is astounding in light of Jeremiah 32:35 which provides in part, "They built high places to Baal in the Valley of Ben-hinnom, and immolated their sons and daughters to Molech, bringing sin upon Judah; this I never commanded them, nor did it even enter my mind that they should practice such abomination." Here, God instructs man NOT to cause a child to be killed as a form of sacrifice to God. Clearly, sacrificing a child by denying him or her a needed blood transfusion is no different. In no way does such a denial of blood and the child's resulting death please the Almighty. It never entered God's mind.

34

Is there a new "full court press" to bring back "lost ones"?

by tenyearsafter in

i ask the question because all of a sudden i am getting bombarded by my mother and other family members to "take my wife's hand and run back to jehovah before it is too late"!!

i am getting e-mail with screen shots of the un website (http://www.un.org/en/peace) stating "peace and security", being told that this could likely be the last memorial celebrated and that the door to the ark will be closing soon.

has anyone else been seeing an up-tick in these "prodigal son" appeals from jw friends and family?

jonathan dough

and that the door to the Ark will be closing soon.

Another false JW teaching to chase you in, prematurely. Revelation makes it clear that the door to the ark stays open during the Great Tribulation, before Armagedon. The opportunity to repent continues after the JWs' false doctrine of abrupt closure.

See Rev. 9:20,21.

http://www.144000.110mb.com/

Ray Franz claimed they regularly use such tactics to drive up membership when they are low on funds.

34

Just saw with MY OWN eyes the JWs have THEIR OWN Bible!

by FollowedMyHeart in

first, i wouldn't have seen this w/o simon's jwn, publishingcult's bible humor thread, sweetbabycheezits' non stamp collector link, and non stamp collector.

i've always heard this, but this is the first time i've actually seen it for myself!.

jephthah and his daughter.

jonathan dough

Does anyone know which other Bibles translate John 1:1 as "the Word was a god"? besides the NWT...

34

Just saw with MY OWN eyes the JWs have THEIR OWN Bible!

by FollowedMyHeart in

first, i wouldn't have seen this w/o simon's jwn, publishingcult's bible humor thread, sweetbabycheezits' non stamp collector link, and non stamp collector.

i've always heard this, but this is the first time i've actually seen it for myself!.

jephthah and his daughter.

jonathan dough

Critics decry their NWT Bible as being written, or mistranslated, by non-Greek speaking pseudo-scholars, totally unqualified to translate the Greek into any language. This criticism is robust and extensive. Here are just a few examples of how they have altered God's word:

Whereas the great majority of Bibles interpret John 1:1 as "...the Word was God," the New World Translation claims the "Word was a god," thereby denying the deity of Christ. Collosians 1:17 provides that the Word was "before all things" and therefore could not have been created but is eternal, but the New World Translation inserts the word "other" to allow room for the Word's creation and inferiority to God, stating that the Word was "before all [other] things." Throughout the New Testament of the New World Translation, the word "Lord" is changed to "Jehovah" despite the tetragrammaton YHWH not existing in any of the known 5,000 original manuscript texts. The word "in" is changed to "in union with" so that Christ is not actually within the Christian, thereby denying the indwelling. Christ's identifying himself as the I AM and deity is changed to "I have been" at John 8:58.

The list goes on. The New World Translation Bible's voluminous mistranslations are extensive and profoundly alter the very definition of Christianity. It is the primary tool employed to turn mainstream Christianity upside down and invert 2,000 years of Bible truths. And it is no wonder that respected critics of the New World Translation Bible refer to selected portions of their works as "a shocking mistranslation," "obsolete and incorrect," and "an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar." Bible students are cautioned in relying solely on the New World Translation Bible and should seriously consider cross-referencing it with reputable texts. Better yet, discard the New World Translation altogether and get a real Bible. Reliable Christian texts are abundant.

http://www.144000.110mb.com/directory/new_world_translation_bible_holy_scriptures.html

24

How The WT's 144,000 Theology Hijacks Their Annual Memorial Meeting

by Room 215 in

at last year's local memorial service, purported to honor jesus' sacrificial death and its signficance to the eternal prospects of humanity, the visiting speaker from bethel quite remarkably managed to talk for almost an hour without one recourse to the word "resurrection".. a remarkable achievement, given its centrality in the belief system of nominal christianity.

nor were the stirring moments of high drama in the bible's depicting of jesus last hours on earth-- his last supper and his prayer for the well-being of his disciples, the betrayal of judas, the agony of the garden; his disciples' succumbing to sleep; his betrayal and arrest in the garden of gethesemane; the scattering of his fear-gripped disciples; peter's denial, and the climactic soul-stirring awareness of the signficance of the empty tomb and its guardian's chilling pronouncement to mary magdalene and the women "why are you searching for the living among the dead?"...

and so on, to his post-resurrection appearance at emmaus, etc.. all of this was swept aside in favor of convincing those in attendance that they had no business in partaking of the emblematic bread and wine.

jonathan dough

There is not such thing as a literal 144,000 anointed JWs who rule over earth from heaven. It is impossible.

http://144000.110mb.com/144000/index.html

The information on this issue and related issues begins with a brief summary of the Jehovah's Witnesses' beliefs. It then examines several areas of interest with respect to that religion's false teachings, such as, a) whether only 144,000 Jehovah's Witnesses go to heaven to rule over earthly subjects and the Great Crowd, b) whether Christ's Second Coming occurred in 1914, and whether Jesus began ruling over God's kingdom in 1914 but received only a subsidiary share of that kingdom, c) whether the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is limited to only God, Jesus and the 144,000 and whether that eternal covenant lasts only 2,000 years, d) whether resurrected man can be perfected through their educational salvation program during the thousand year reign, e) whether man is not judged for deeds committed during this life but only those committed during the 1,000 year reign, f) whether the first resurrection began in 1918, g) whether Jesus Christ is actually dispensed with after the millennial reign, and much more.

Other websites are here: http://www.144000.110mb.com/directory/jehovahs_witnesses_144000_144_000_heaven.html