Posts by Sea Breeze

7

The blood of the covenant and forgivness of sins

by enoughisenough in

i am pasting in a copy of an email i hope my friend will read...i watched a video by bridget from az and i had thoughs i had never even considered before.

this is interesting : matt 26:28 for this means my 'blood of the covenant,' which is to be poured out in behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.according to wt, the christian greek scriptures were ( see copy ) wt 74 6/15 serve with eternity in view : also, it is to the spirit-anointed christians who will rule in that kingdom that most of the christian greek scriptures is directed, including the promises of everlasting life ( pasted from wt 74 6/15).

so matt 26:28 is at the lord's evening meal where the new covenant is being initiated.

Sea Breeze

Good reasoning. Also consider:

"poured out in behalf of many" ... not few as in a little flock.

Bottom line is the new covenant is for sinners to get their sins forgiven, not government positions in heaven.

68

Where it all went wrong for the WT - JF Rutherford

by LoveUniHateExams in

i was thinking a bit about this the other day.

ct russell, from what i remember about him, kinda seemed like a genuine, nice(ish) guy, although he had a few eccentric but harmless ideas.. during the russell era jws (actually bible students) could still celebrate christmas, worship in other churches if there was no kingdom hall available, and accept blood transfusions.. then after russell died, along came rutherford - a major league a-hole, for sure.. rutherford had plenty of eccentric ideas but at least some of them weren't/aren't harmless.

some have been long forgotten about - jesus depicted without a beard, the plan to rename the names of the week because names such as thursday (thor's day) is pagan, the articles about the 'dangers' of aluminium, etc.. one key contribution of rutherford which does a lot of harm is no blood transfusions, even in life-threatening situations.. another is shunning, something which never occurred under russell, or at least was much milder.. rutherford has a lot to answer for, i reckon ....

Sea Breeze

Lee Marsh,

Thanks for your response. Still sorting through some of the details so that I get the facts straight.

The Hippodrome affair was written about by someone who interviewed Russell. It is in one of the links I posted earlier.

68

Where it all went wrong for the WT - JF Rutherford

by LoveUniHateExams in

i was thinking a bit about this the other day.

ct russell, from what i remember about him, kinda seemed like a genuine, nice(ish) guy, although he had a few eccentric but harmless ideas.. during the russell era jws (actually bible students) could still celebrate christmas, worship in other churches if there was no kingdom hall available, and accept blood transfusions.. then after russell died, along came rutherford - a major league a-hole, for sure.. rutherford had plenty of eccentric ideas but at least some of them weren't/aren't harmless.

some have been long forgotten about - jesus depicted without a beard, the plan to rename the names of the week because names such as thursday (thor's day) is pagan, the articles about the 'dangers' of aluminium, etc.. one key contribution of rutherford which does a lot of harm is no blood transfusions, even in life-threatening situations.. another is shunning, something which never occurred under russell, or at least was much milder.. rutherford has a lot to answer for, i reckon ....

Sea Breeze

@ SlimBoyFat

The apostle Peter wasn't promoting ignorance and private interpretation of scripture as some sort of virtue. Peter writes in 2 Peter 3: 16 & 2 Peter 1: 20

"the unlearned and unstable distort, as they also do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."

17

Tried to warn another mum

by DarleneGatus in

the thing that broke me was that i tried to warn another mum in the congregation about a brother who was inappropriate with my son, which upset me, and so i called her to talk about it since we both knew him and i had also seen him pin her daughter down on the sofa and slap the girl's bottom.

i called it inappropriate, but i never accused him of anything beyond that.. unfortunately, word got back to him and i had to go in front of 3 elders, including the brother who i felt had been inappropriate.

because they came down on me for trying to stop the behavior, and not on him for being the cause of upset, i felt very hurt and started questioning more things.

Sea Breeze

Darlene, thanks for your story! Amazing.

It supports my belief that the sooner a person gets out, the better.....especially if kids are involved.

24

Two Bible teachings JW's DON'T know about....

by BoogerMan in

....but the november 2022 study watchtower will definitely instruct them.. 1) god's name is jehovah!.

2) jehovah is using an earthly organization to do his will - not jesus!.

in study article 45, 'jehovah' is mentioned at least 60 times.

Sea Breeze

There is no early evidence.

Except for all the early evidence right?

24

Two Bible teachings JW's DON'T know about....

by BoogerMan in

....but the november 2022 study watchtower will definitely instruct them.. 1) god's name is jehovah!.

2) jehovah is using an earthly organization to do his will - not jesus!.

in study article 45, 'jehovah' is mentioned at least 60 times.

Sea Breeze

Many millions of Christians reject Vaticanus and Sinaiticus as do I. Modern bible versions rely on them to one extent or another. Early church teachers quote 2 Timothy 3: 16 as written in the Textus Receptus as I quoted.

TR bible versions include:

1. King James Version - KJV

2. King James Version ER (Easy Reader) - KJV - ER

3. New King James Version - NKJV

4. Modern English Version - MEV

5. Green's Literal Translation - GLT

6. Third Millennium Bible - TMB

7. New Cambridge Paragraph Bible - 2005 edition of the KJV (paragraph format with modernized spelling)

8. 21st Century King James Bible

I have little hesitancy using critical text modern versions for reference purposes. I know where most of the problem deletions and interpolations are. But, when it comes to distilling sound doctrine, I recommend a textus receptus (TR) based bible.

24

Two Bible teachings JW's DON'T know about....

by BoogerMan in

....but the november 2022 study watchtower will definitely instruct them.. 1) god's name is jehovah!.

2) jehovah is using an earthly organization to do his will - not jesus!.

in study article 45, 'jehovah' is mentioned at least 60 times.

Sea Breeze

For such a high christology to emerge so early in the writings of the Church fathers does require us to ask how reliable these citations are and whether there is evidence of For later interpolation after the creeds of the fourth and fifth centuries.

Heads I win, tails you lose scenario?

It we had such testimony starting centuries later than we do, heretics would claim that as evidence that the ideas crept into the congregation over time. On the other hand, If such evidence appears too early, then heretics are astonished at the early evidence and wonder if hundreds of pages of historical documents were carefully and dishonestly redacted.

There would have been some outcry at such large-scale dishonesty. But, there is nothing to support such a wide-scale deception. It is an imaginative "just-so" story.

Nothing new here, It is an old trick. But, notice how the premise never changes for heretics, regardless of the evidence: Jesus wasn't "God manifest in the Flesh" (1 Tim. 3: 16) ; and Christian historians and leaders must be liars.

Wild fanciful stuff..... but some will always believe what they want.

The council of Nicea in 325AD denounced the Arian heresy with all but 2 votes out of over three hundred pastors and deacons. (Arius and his assistant were the two?) Most people would call that a landslide, maybe unanimous.

The bottom line is that Jesus’ divinity was not the result of a close decision in the fourth century. Its roots go back to Jesus himself, which is what explains why the church, originally made up of Jews, held to this new view on the deity of Christ ...as unlikely as that could be for a Jew. It is powerful testimony to his miracles, claims and Resurrection.

True, Jesus did not go around stating the exact words, " I am God". He would not have been able to complete his ministry if he did. But he said that he was God in many other ways, that are perhaps stronger evidence.

He claimed to be the great "I AM". The Jewish leaders went berserk over that claim. He claimed that he would lay down his life and he would resurrect himself, which he did. He claimed that he could forgive sins (something only God can do), He healed lepers, blindness from birth, raised the dead, accepted worship, could read peoples' minds, and claimed equality with the father. His statements in total indicate that he both considered himself fully man and fully God. Man in flesh, God in Spirit. And Christians accepted his claims from the get go.

It is hard to ignore a man who walked out of a tomb after a very public and messy death just 3 days prior, even if you are an orthodox Jew who is going to lose everything if you believe him.

27

Is This New?

by Lost in the fog in

it is a very long time since i was an elder and the elders textbooks have changed multiple times since then.

going back to when i was an elder, to the best of my knowledge the only way a spouse could divorce from his/her partner was porneia, if that person had sexual relations with a man, woman, child, or beast.

but it had to be proven and that's the dubious 2 witness rule.. in fact, if it was not proven and the innocent party divorced and married someone else, then they could be hauled up in front of a judicial committee and be charged with committing adultery and disfellowshipped!

Sea Breeze

an older person who got dementia or Alzheimer's and forgot they were ever a jw and started going to the church service (mainstream non jw) at the nursing home

The horror.

22

How Many Of You Knew Something Was Really Wrong Growing Up JW? What was Your First Clue?

by Sea Breeze in

this is directed to born-ins.

around age 10 or 12 is when it first hit me.

i started asking questions about how the world worked and i really wanted an honest opinion from my parents.

Sea Breeze

This is directed to born-ins.

Around age 10 or 12 is when it first hit me. I started asking questions about how the world worked and I really wanted an honest opinion from my parents. I noticed they would always give me canned answers from WT publications. I wasn't opposed to the WT at that time, it just irritated me that they couldn't give me a straight answer using their own thinking, in their own words.

I used to fling myself on the ground (like 10 year olds sometimes do) and ask them to just tell me what they thought. They would just repeat WT answers almost verbatim.... I could tell that their behavior was unnatural, even mechanical.

I knew then that something was very wrong. My family didn't talk like other people did. It was all so......scripted.

What about you?

7

Bill & Joan Cetnar Expose Watchtower Claims

by Sea Breeze in

in this classic interview with john ankerberg, bill and joan cetnar expose many outlandish watchtower claims.

it is a major part of ex-jw history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcwrmtfdeji&t=709s&ab_channel=mr.alithea .

Sea Breeze

Both have passed.