so i decided yesterday to give my wife's full disclosure.
not sure it was the best decision considering she holds very firmly to the resurrection hope so we can see our babies again.. anyways she is agreeable to begin a study to find a better truth.
where is a good place to go to get some good reliable biblical info on the web that we can consider together?.
The Message bible is kinda fun to read, but it is really a highly paraphrased translation. I personally like the NIV, ESV and NET. The ESV is, IMO, closer to the original Greek, so in many places reads as unnaturally as the NWT. But the same biases aren't there (though I'm sure there are other biases).
You could always download the YouVersion app to your mobile devices and choose nearly any translation you want without spending a dime.
welcome to warwick safety orientation!
each warwick volunteer is required to view the entire three-hour program and complete the five short quizzes one week before arriving at warwick.
to benefit fully from each of the five sections, we recommend that you set aside time in a quiet location with minimal distractions and give the program your full attention.
at the latest co visit something very strange happened.
during the meeting with the elders and servants he passed out a copy of a hypothetical publisher card and asked us what we could learn from it.
upon receiving it i saw that the average hours were pretty good, it had return visits and quite a few bible studies.
i haven't found a scripture where it says that baptism is a dedication to god.
i have only found in the book of acts chapter 2 i believe where baptism is for forgiveness of sins.
am i wrong?
Here are my notes on the topic:
Dedication
The word “dedication” is never used in the scriptures related to baptism. The first mention of any baptism is in Matthew 3:6, so this was not a practice common to the Israelites until a much later period. The only time the word dedication is used in the Greek scriptures is at John 10:22 in relation to the “Festival of Dedication”. The word “dedicated” is used three times in the Greek scriptures, at Matthew 15:5, Mark 7:11 and Luke 21:5. Both Matthew and Mark were discussing corban, a gift dedicated to God, while Luke was discussing how the temple was “adorned with fine stones and dedicated things”. None of these were associated in any way with baptism.
That leaves me to wonder, then why does the Society feel we must first dedicate ourselves to God as a prerequisite to baptism? The scriptures make no such statement. This is yet another example of going “beyond the things that are written.”
Something to note are these two comments from decades ago:
w70 7/1 p. 404 par. 13
Christians must appreciate these facts. Their dedication is not to an organization nor to a work. Neither is it to a human or a government; it is only to the Creator himself, to Jehovah God, through Jesus Christ.
w66 10/1 pp. 603-604 par. 15
We do not dedicate ourselves to a religion, nor to a man, nor to an organization. No, we dedicate ourselves to the Supreme Sovereign of the Universe, our Creator, Jehovah God himself.
The use of “dedication” apparently comes from Jesus’ statement at Matt 16:24: “Then Jesus said to his disciples: “If anyone wants to come after me, let him disown himself and pick up his torture stake and keep following me.”
the 2015 annual meeting, specifically, part 1, right about minute 27, has anthony morris emphasizing that "you're better off reading one chapter (of the bible) and really absorbing it" than just reading the whole thing "as a challenge".
while i agree with the the whole idea of meditating on anything you read, it was doing this very thing that brought up so many unanswered questions.
i also came to the constant realization that the jws did not have a clue about what the bible really said.
They've said, "Read the Bible daily" for years and years and years. A few years ago, when I
started waking up, I was like: "Challenge accepted." And I read it. Not
just to read, but to do exactly what Mr. Morris said, really absorb it. This was a huge launch into me no longer believing JWs had the truth.
That said, the organization has members way too busy to read the Bible and really absorb it. Thus, the majority will not do so.
Personally, I've never heard of any JW doing that. If they do, it's not openly admitted. I suspect that some who converted from another religion might, but those born in the religion most likely do not.
Let's take a poll here, since the audience of this forum is made up of both current and ex-JWs. Who here, while a JW, talked to Jesus?
I never did because I was taught it was wrong to do so. And yes, I considered talking to Jesus the same as praying to him.
I've been a JW for over forty years. I can assure you that JWs do not pray to Jesus. As for talking to Jesus, to be honest, as far as I can tell, that has never been written about. I would dare to say that the vast majority do not. They would view praying and talking as the same thing. The most recent information on praying to Jesus found in the October 1, 2010 Watchtower. It says:
"Does the Bible instruct us to pray to Jesus, to Mary, to saints, or to angels? No—only to Jehovah. Consider two reasons why. First, prayer is a form of worship, and the Bible says that worship should go exclusively to Jehovah. (Exodus 20:5) Second, the Bible reveals that he bears the title “Hearer of prayer.” (Psalm 65:2) Although Jehovah delegates generously, this is a responsibility he has never passed on to anyone. He is the God who promises to hear our prayers personally."
The same Watchtower says this a little later:
"Here is yet another essential aspect of how to pray. Jesus said: “No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6) So Jesus is the means of our approach to the Father, Jehovah. Thus, Jesus told his followers to pray in his name. (John 14:13; 15:16) That does not mean that we should pray to Jesus. Rather, we pray in the name of Jesus, remembering that Jesus is the reason that we are able to approach our perfect and holy Father." (italics in the original article)
jehovah`s witnesses place great emphasis on the importance of god`s name as jehovah .so much so that they are often accused by christendom`s religions as substituting jehovah for christ.. the old testament ( hebrew scriptures identify god as the tetragrammaton four hebrew consanants yhwh and not jhvh.
as mistakenly believed by a 13th century spanish monk .. modern scholars including the j.w.`s agree that the more accurate pronunciation of gods name would be more nearer to yahweh than the name jehovah .. so why do j.w.`s insist on the name ?
jehovah ?
In northern California, there's a religious radio station that you can listen to down around Chico. Last year, when driving through the area, there was a program on and the guy talked about the name "Jehovah". He stated that it is the commonly used name in English. Other names are Yahweh or Jahveh (J in Hebrew is pronounce with a Y sound and V in Hebrew is pronounced with a W sound, thus some say Jahveh is the correct name, but I digress...). This guy didn't say anything at all about JWs... he was just being matter of fact about the name and its use in modern-day English.
I couldn't help but chuckle at this preacher from Christendom using the name Jehovah. I shook my head at this because of how long I was indoctrinated by WTBTS saying that Christendom hates that name and refuses to use it. Big ol' lie.
when i became an elder i saw the dark side.
a side i previously believed couldn't possibly exist in the one true religion of the happiest people on earth.. then they rolled out 'overlapping generations(tm)' and that was the last straw.. all my life i had doubts but surpressed them thinking i was at fault and not the cult leaders.. it seems more likely that now the governing body are parading around like popes, wearing their expensive jewellery, that this will nauseate even dyed in the wool jws.. i wonder if the wake up can be condensed into main categories?.
1. experiencing the cruel handling of matters by the wbt$ reps.. 2. crazy doctrine (eg.
as the date of return of the lord jesus christ and the beginning of his invisible presence or parousia.
what, then, about the parousia (presence) of christ?
so a.d. 1914 marks the time of christs invisible return in spirit.
