Posts by JosephMalik

13

scriptual basis for "paradise" very thin?

by highdose in

has anyone noticed that the scriptures that jw's use to back up their claim of a paradise earth is very weak?

i think theres only one or two over quoted ones and the others are taken out of context.. is this just me?

or has anyone else noticed this?.

JosephMalik

I noticed that the bible never says "paradise earth"

Blondie,

Of course not. It is not as if they were scientists or astronomers of had a concept of the solar system and universe the way modern man now does. They lived on the land and this word served this same purpose for them. They did not have to keep saying it to know where they were going to be. 24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. 25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: 26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? 27 She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world. On what basis then would anyone say that Lazarus or anyone else especially those that would never die be resurrected on the last day and go to a world someplace else just because they did not say earth? It is the world of mankind under discussion here that live on the land not a world someplace else. It does not matter to me if the WTS said something like this and I wanted to get at them somehow. It matters to me what Christ did, how and where, what he meant and what we as disciples should say when teaching others later.

Joseph

28

What are the fruits that we are supposed to recognize?

by bluecanary in

i posted most of this on another thread but i want this to stand alone so i can refer back to it in the future.

one of our resident apologists has given her response on this thread.

you can judge the relative worth of her response for yourself.. "by their fruit you will recognize them.

JosephMalik

wantingtruth,

Very good rus v. See how we can help each other if we are reasonable and have Christ instead of an organization as our hope. Thanks for your thoughts.

Joseph

13

scriptual basis for "paradise" very thin?

by highdose in

has anyone noticed that the scriptures that jw's use to back up their claim of a paradise earth is very weak?

i think theres only one or two over quoted ones and the others are taken out of context.. is this just me?

or has anyone else noticed this?.

JosephMalik

Highdose,

Weak? Perhaps that is because the thinking of many is word dependent and other words used to describe our future hope in Christ like Kingdom of Israel or Throne of David or Holy City coming down from heaven and New Jerusalem do not register with them as being in the same place. That all such things will take place right here on earth including the resurrection of the dead is missed by most churches. There is not a single scripture in the Bible that says that we will go to heaven the way Jesus did. None. What is actually taught is that Jesus will return here to this earth as a human being once again. Yes a Man identified as the last Adam. 1Co 15:45 Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. But since words like spiritual are used in such verses people are taught to think non-human instead of God given provision of God and/or an immortal human as well. And such use or words like spirit with human believers is ignored. Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, Now the word heaven is used in many verses as well since it was used in place of the word God or God approved but never in a way that states that we will go someplace else in order to be a part of it. A heavenly Kingdom is a God approved Kingdom with a human on its throne. You see I believe in Jesus who said to the thief executed alongside him, Lu 23:43 And he said to him, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise." And promises God made like this: Lu 1:32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, But I prefer to be part of the Kingdom in this Paradise as a follower of Christ and not simply as part of the general population that the word paradise describes the thief will enjoin.

Joseph

28

What are the fruits that we are supposed to recognize?

by bluecanary in

i posted most of this on another thread but i want this to stand alone so i can refer back to it in the future.

one of our resident apologists has given her response on this thread.

you can judge the relative worth of her response for yourself.. "by their fruit you will recognize them.

JosephMalik

AllTimeJeff,

Yes indeed. It is precisely because of their doctrine that they are suffering and dying refusing blood among other things while pretending to show love to one another. It was for good reason that Paul said: 1Co 3:4 For when one says, "I belong to Paul," and another, "I belong to [the Watchtower? oops] Apollos," are you not merely men? 5 What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. 6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. 7 So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, [including the Watchtower] but only God who gives the growth. . . . 11 For no other foundation can any one lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. And they have all denied Christ by their doctrine including those partakers that claim to be anointed and they seem proud in doing it as witnesses or observers. Mt 10:33 but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven. Pitiful people with pitiful doctrines.

Joseph

28

What are the fruits that we are supposed to recognize?

by bluecanary in

i posted most of this on another thread but i want this to stand alone so i can refer back to it in the future.

one of our resident apologists has given her response on this thread.

you can judge the relative worth of her response for yourself.. "by their fruit you will recognize them.

JosephMalik

Bluecanary,

Since the WTS does not teach correct doctrine, I prefer to focus on it. They will disfellowship anyone that questions them since their attitude is like Diotrophes in the first century. 3John 9 I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. 10 Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church. 11 Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God. The WTS is evil through and through and not just on this matter of love.

Joseph

28

What are the fruits that we are supposed to recognize?

by bluecanary in

i posted most of this on another thread but i want this to stand alone so i can refer back to it in the future.

one of our resident apologists has given her response on this thread.

you can judge the relative worth of her response for yourself.. "by their fruit you will recognize them.

JosephMalik

"By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."-John 13:35 The most important identifying factors for "true" religion hinge on how persons follow these commands. Individual "imperfection" is irrelevant. Choice in doctrines is secondary, to be considered only after first determining whether the religion follows the law of love.

Bluecanary,

Not according to our Lord. Mt 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Mt 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. Or his Apostle Paul: Titus 1:9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. 10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: 11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake. 12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. 13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;

We do not learn everything we need to know in one verse. And nowhere do we learn that doctrines are secondary to a law of love. Such things taken together from all the sources available to us are requirements for the faith. John who for a time was a party to the apostasy of keeping the Law and circucision that existed in Jerusalem and one that nearly had the Apostle Paul killed had through personal experience a good reason to make this point regarding love. It could have prevented that bad experience to a man an Apostle teaching the truth to them. And looking up words like truth, doctrine, teaching(s) antichrist, man of lawlessness bring all this out. Furthermore I do not attempt to presume what Jesus would have said to satisfy my opinions on such things so I will not bother with that statement. It is only required for us to observe the things that he did say and what he instructed his Apostles to later reveal.

Joseph

7

Resurrection of the dead, JWs and 1 Corinthians 15

by Chalam in

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/181048/4/did-jesus-ever-claim-messiahship.

stephen, i really enjoy seeing different interpretations of the scriptures.

keep on doing what you do, man.. i want to know what you mean by your post.

JosephMalik

I'm totally lost on the firstborn thing It sounds like you're saying that when the Bible refers to Jesus as the firstborn, that is referring specifically to him being the first raised from the dead--but that doesn't make any sense because others were resurrected in the old testament. Unless he was the first resurrected to heaven. Can you clarify this, please?

Bluecanary,

I pondered this same problem over 30 years ago and came to understand what happened at the resurrection after carefully listening to the texts on tape. Resurrection under New Testament rules is not the same as it was with the resurrection of the others you mentioned. Why? Because anyone resurrected under New Testament rules while still human, would be immortal. Paul make this clear enough when He corrected Corinthian thinking and this would be true for anyone raised for any reason. The seed we sow is human and will be raised human. Now was Jesus not raised a little early as an immortal human for such rules to take effect? No for Jesus gave up his non-human seed or life to begin with and could get it back. Furthermore He gained immortality as a human before He died so it did not matter for Him. His resurrection was the first of such future immortal human resurrections promised for the rest of us. This is also the very reason why all humanity raised by Him would now qualify to be immortal. He regained what Adam lost when he was prevented from eating of the tree of life. The thinking goes according to its Kind, like for like, the purpose of the tree of life in the first place with its intended use and such teachings of the past that apply to us as humans. How this immortality happened and when is another discussion but I put it at His transfiguration. That is the only event during His ministry that seems to fit.

But I must add that there is another detail that made all this confusing to me. What? The resurrection of Jesus as the non-human He was before He became flesh and known as the Word or Logos. Or put another way, the resurrection the life and Nature of the one now known as Jesus as the God and creator of us that was appointed over us by God Himself in the beginning of the human race as John testified in John 1:1. Nothing unusual about using the expression God in this way by Jews as the scriptures did it in several places and it does not make two true God’s or Supreme Beings but everyone seems to have a fit over it. It was not everyday or frequent use and many did not grasp it even back then. So what did happen in the special case of Jesus? Well God answered His prayer when Jesus prayed: John 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. 6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. 7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. 8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. This is what happened then at that time. As the Logos or Word was now made alive once again, and as the creator of the human race given him, it was no problem for this Word to raise the body that was executed and take on both Natures seamlessly in order to fulfill the tasks still assigned to Him. We still refer to Jesus as fully human and He will return as a human to raise the dead and rule as testified to in Acts 1, but we also see the Nature of the non-human that appeared to Paul and chose Paul to be his Apostle to the Jews and Gentiles so as not to confuse this event with His coming again as a man. I decided to call this the hypostasis nature of Christ as the generic meaning of this Trinitarian term fits. And since we had no such prior seed or life this dual nature does not apply to us. Further details of how this could be are simply not make known to us other but the reality of it was explained in scripture as brought out in this thread.

Joseph

15

And death will be know more!

by the sage in

have you lost a love one recently?.

or been reminded of the loss of a public personality, of past or present?.

we can take comfort, jehovah has promised.. english standard version: re.21:4.. "he will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and(k) death shall be no more,(l) neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.".

JosephMalik

We can take comfort, Jehovah has promised. Rev 21:4

The Sage,

Well I see that you have taken the usual flack but like Blues Brothers said: “What is the point?” Is the point that this scripture applies to JW’s and they are the only ones in good stead with Jehovah? Are they the only ones to enjoy such a blessed reward? Where is the proof? Now I see a promise like this in the texts: Rev. 21:3 . . . Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. But I do not see Jehovah’s witnesses mentioned in it anywhere. So how do you know that it will apply to them or you? What have you or Jehovah’s witnesses done to fulfill the requirement described simply as overcome? Rev. 21:7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. Since this verse deals with the individual involved and not a collective group belonging to some belief system, how is it that any church can take such verses and apply them to their organization? And look at this: Rev 21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. Again I do not see Jehovah’s witnesses mentioned or even words like anointed or holy ones. The word Nations does not even indicate that the participants are believers yet they somehow made it into the book of life. Disciples are called holy ones or saints. So what does this mean? Are there good people in among the Nations that are apart from true believers and disciples to which such verses are targeted? Rev 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb’s book of life. Are Jehovah’s witnesses free from such condemnation, free from lie’s, undefiled, not an abominaton? Was their teaching that 1935 was some sort of turning point and partaking of the Emblems was no longer a requirement for the vast majority of them a truth? They admit now that they were wrong but still do not open it up for every believer. And think of all those that lived and died among those that believed this lie? And since the scriptures teach that Christ will return bodily and the Witnesses do not, who is right? The men in white robes of the Watchtower? Take something simple like Judas. Did Judas partake of the memorial bread and wine? The Watchtower says no but the scriptures say: Luke 22: 19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. 20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. 21 But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. 22 And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed! 23 And they began to enquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing. And this was not even the first time that they argued among themselves that night. Blues Brothers wanted to know the point or your remark and I would like to know as well. Who is wrong on something so simple and can determine who benefits from such a text? Luke or the Watchtower? Or put another way was it Jesus or the Watchtower? Is the disregard of our Lord’s clear identification of who was present an abomination. Are we to listen to Jesus or to witnesses to get such truth and why should any of us be comforted?

Joseph

12

1John

by PSacramento in

every morning i read the bible.. yypically i read everyday, in order, the nt, when i finish i start again and everytime i read it i find something the hits me, in a good way lol !.

today i read 1john and decided to post about it :).

john is probably my favorite writer of the nt, his writing is beautiful and eloquent and truly express the most important teachings of jesus (in my very humble view), that of love.. and nowhere is that more evident than in the frst letter of john.. john makes it clear from the very beginning that god is light and light is love and to walk with god is to walk with love and no love means no god.. john syas the man that does the will of god lives forever and that the will is love.. john speaks of those that deny that jesus is the christ,that he was made flesh, that there are the antichrists ( plural not single).. we are all children of god for god dwells in us if love dwells in us, love not only of words but of actions.. john reiterates jesus last comandment that we love one another as he loves us, to give up our lives for one another just as jesus did for us.. note: the loving part goes back to matthew too where jesus says to love those that don't love us, for if we love only those that loves us, what's the big freaking deal?

JosephMalik

We go back to Johns definition of antichrist: Those that deny Jesus was Christ and made flesh.

Psacramento,

I always took it that John’s words applied to those teaching at the time about the more recent and also future appearances of Christ, namely after His death and resurrection, rather than the times that involved his birth and human life prior to His sacrifice. There were no significant arguments about the humanity or the flesh of Jesus prior to His death at least not among anyone claiming fellowship with Christ. Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. But after His sacrifice and resurrection, even the Apostles had problems with our Lord’s humanity, and this would be a problem for many converts from then on including the Watchtower to this very day. Lu 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. This human reality, such human existence both then and in the future is what John meant. Therefore he said: 1Jo 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. Such spirits or disciples made up alternate doctrines about Christ’s resurrection like going to someplace else the way He did to be in a future Kingdom and living like non-humans instead of being resurrected to live here on earth as demonstrated and promised by Christ. This involved failure to understand the Jewish meanings of words like heaven which word simply substituted for the word God to them. They did not correct their thinking the way the Apostles did and they existed with other disciples at the time John lived so John said: 2Jo 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. They did not grasp the words of John or Luke and avoided the reality of a real Kingdom of Israel here on earth that was intended for them all including so called holy ones or annointed ones present when Luke wrote: Acts 1: 10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. This is the situation we are in now where so many teach they will go to heaven to live when the scriptures show that Christ will come in like manner in the flesh to live and establish the promised kingdom as testified to by the men in white robes.

Joseph

5

Not Their Fault?

by PSacramento in

a friend of mine say this, " if they had found the answers elsewhere, they wouldn't have turned to the jw's".. i recall my mother mentioning the samething to me when she became a jw, that they had the answers and that no one else did.. answers to questions that other religions just didn't have a "convincing" enought reply to.. of course i asked, "how do you know?

have you asked and researched?".

the answer typically comes back "well, er..yes..not really..or from what i was given by the wt...".

JosephMalik

Is it the fault of the religions that people leave to join the WT and become JW's or does it fall on those leaving to truly find out what religion they are leaving and to what are they entering?

PSacramento,

Both! This is a real problem with real consequences. Smarter is not always better. We can easily go from bad to worse. What should we do? Matt 16:24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. 26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? 27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. We were not told to go after a religion by this man that we think we are serving. We were told to follow him. Are we doing that or are we depending on others or a religion full of assumptions and errors they are always correcting to tell us what to do and how?

Joseph