i don`t think so .
hasn`t science ,astronomy ,time , .....proven it an illogical beleif ?.
with the information about this solar system and it`s planets ,other stars and their planets that we have information about ,and the fact that no god has ever revealed him/her self in any shape or form 'there is no evidence that a creator / god has ever existed.. except in the minds of humans who want to control a section of humanity .. the fact that religions rely on "you have to have faith" to beleive in a god ,surely is a cop out.. i look forward to your comments .. and a happy new year to you all..
It never was logical to believe in a creator in any age. And as to morals, this here Atheist does what is right even if big brother or Sky daddy isn't watching me, because I have a Moral Compass.
You lot who are only moral out of fear of your imaginary friend frighten me !
the answer is a definite no!.
because every doctrine that is unique to jehovah's witnesses is not in the bible.
the unique doctrines of jehovah’s witnesses are the ones that only jehovah’s witnesses teach.
" Bible based does not mean biblical." That is the point ! Not that I see it as vital that Theology or Christology should not have evolved since the bible was written. Those two things evolved over the time the N.T was written !
But, the "Bible based" thing is typical j.w Org. double speak, to the public and the average J.W, those words mean the beliefs can be shown unequivocally to be in Scripture, and as Van-the-man has shown , they re NOT !
The Quran and Book of Mormon are just as "Bible based" as the J.W's beliefs are, which means they are not Biblical !
isn’t it about time they released the report for the service year?
or have they stopped publishing it?
did they released selected figures at the annual meeting as they usually do, such as the memorial attendance or record number of pioneers?
Well, I await Slimboy's excellent analysis of the figures again this year. If you have time Slim, a comparison with other religion's Reports will be interesting too.
mark jones explains the watchtower gospel much better than i can.. "the good news that christians in the first century preached was the birth, death and resurrection of jesus christ; that all those who believed in him were saved and reconciled to god through the death of his son.. unfortunately jehovah’s witnesses) have been led to believe it is something bizarrely different.
the good news according to the watchtower society is as follows:.
the the good news (according to jehovah’s witnesses).
" None of those words attributed (in the synoptic gospels) to Jesus said Jesus required belief in the resurrection of Jesus! " Good point !
"Mark" was the first Gospel that we find in the N.T to be written, Matthew and Luke copy "Mark" word for a word to a great degree, and then add their two cents. The "Long Ending" to Mark is a later addition, because "Mark" lacked any real reference to the resurrection as significant perhaps.
This reluctance to include BELIEF in the Resurrection as vital to being saved is not really contradictory to the earliest teaching we have on Christianity in the N.T, that of Paul, but of course, if one denied the FACT of the Resurrection, that person would be automatically an Apostate from their Brethren's point of view.
So Mark Jones' summary of the Good News is not so far off, it was a simple message, which is why it had such appeal, and why Christianity spread like a flame in dry tinder.
Jehovah's Witnesses do not preach this simple message, they add to it, complicate it, and make it not just less effective in promoting Christianity, but ruin it.
http://www.vogue.co.uk/vogue_daily/story/story.asp?stid=14388
campbell's god mother .
valerie campbell has admitted that she is a devout jehovah's witness.
What always annoyed me when I was in, was the Cult of Celebrity that was within the J.W's. The G.B and writing Committee were guilty of fawning over any celebrity that was even on the outer limits of the Org, and individual J.W's were really into it, I remember loads of lads at one Convention many years ago, all wearing a Michael Jackson glove !
Also individual J.W's would make anyone fairly "high up" in the Org. a celebrity, I saw some sickening brown nosing at times, pathetic.
for the same reasons jw's reject christmas they use the name jehovah.. dec 25 is the recognized day to celebrate the birth of christ in the world.- we use jehovah because it is the recognized name of the father in the world.. it dishonors jesus because we don't know the actual date of jesus birth- even though we don't know the actual pronouncing of gods name it brings honor to god to use it.
even though the angels rejoiced at the birth of jesus, no where in the bible does it say we should celebrate it.
even though no where in the bible does it say christians are to be witnesses of jehovah, we proudly bear his name!.
"Exactly. The REAL reason they don’t want members to celebrate Christmas and other holidays is to keep them away from non-Witness relatives and friends." Spot on ! Once your find out how wonderful your "worldly" family and friends are, your J.W "conditional" family and friends are just not of an acceptable standard.
I don't know for sure, but it was, I think, the desire to make the Bible Students stand out somewhat that Russell used the name Jehovah so much, and certainly it was big part for the choice of name for the group that Rutherford made.
i've missed seeing his posts; i hope he's okay - maybe on a nice vacation (or i guess i should say holiday) and enjoying himself..
Hope everything is O.K. with Punkie, lovely guy. I urged him to get proper help, I hope he did, part of his therapy may be a rest from anything vaguely J.W ?
If you read this Buddy, we are here for you !
a friend is just after sending this to me.. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/zcrssl/schism_in_jehovahs_witnesses_over_secret_abuse/.
This is going to spread, especially if the Org. loses in a High Court in some Country or other. And they DESERVE to lose, the Shunning Policy, and more importantly the way the Practice is carried out, goes against at least two of the U.N and European Human Rights as enshrined in Law.
The org. likes to hide behind one such Right, Freedom of Religion.
I forget where it was, but one Judge I think it was, pointed out that Freedom of Religion NEVER trumps other Human Rights.
bumped into a former jw friend who since departing has joined a protestant church.. his explanation of the trinity is "think of the congregation service committee in the jw religion, the three people who locally made all of the decisions affecting the congregation.".
three people each with their own personality who individually were seen as the coordinator, the service overseer, and the secretary.
but who made decisions as a combined unit.. so on the midweek meeting it was announced that "the service committee has approved the following..." .
When we try to explain things which are supposed to be in the Spiritual Realm, we humans always have to resort to anthropomorphisms and to anything from the physical world to help us with our conception, our grasp of what we are trying to talk about.
Hence we fail, through lack of language to describe that which is irrational, metaphysical, and totally unproven.
The best explanation I ever read for how to understand the Trinity Doctrine was by a Christadelphian, written about 150 years ago, I cannot find it on-line at present, my copy died with my old Laptop. Christadelphians do not subscribe to the Doctrine !
The other Thread on here, just revived, on "The Holy Spirit" is fascinating, erudite stuff, and shows the evolution of Doctrine, which is what resulted in the Trinity.
As Leolaia says in that Thread, the J.W org loves to quote Scholars who say the Trinity Doctrine is not found in the Bible, but the org. neglects to say that the roots and foundation of the Doctrine ARE in Scripture.
the wt engages in history revisionism when insisting the world changed overnight in 1914. in fact the european power struggles that came to a head were centuries old.
millions of lives had been lost in the wars of the 19th century, with the world a powder keg the years prior to the assassination of franz ferdinand in june 1914 which is often said, albeit rather arbitrarily, as the start of the war that escalated over the next 4 years into the great war.
take a look at these two pages and ask if the wt's interpretation of history seems accurate to you.
Thank you Van !
"Fisherman" offered the old False Dichotomy Fallacy, just two ways to look at 1914 according to Fish, but you have shown a Third Way, and a correct way, without painful eisegesis stretching incredulity to the limit, you cannot come up with any dates for events to happen, i.e Bible prophecy. The various Works we find in the Bible were not written with that intention, or vision, they did not look forward thousands of years, even when predicting "End Times" the writers thought they were almost upon them !
"Bible" predictions were deliberately vague, and if you analyse them just briefly, they all failed.
