Posts by simwitness

58

Did Jesus have a BEGGINING?

by gumby in

jw
friends

in a thread called" can any jw answer this" by jerome, alan f had stated that the term.

everlasting to everlasting applied only to the god of israel.

he could find no scripture in which this term applied to jesus.. i found some good info.

simwitness

AlanF, a question for you.

If Jesus was just claiming to be "really, really old" why did the Jews start to stone him? It was allways explained to me that it was for blasphemy, or for his claim to be the "I AM".

27

The collapse of the WBTS? - I don't think so.

by dmouse in

jw
friends

do we apostates fall into the same trap as jehovahs witnesses when it comes to blinding ourselves to the truth?.

how often have i confronted jws with overwhelming evidence that the so called signs of the times are simply not being fulfilled in our day only for them to bring up some barely relevant snippet of information, which, to them, shoots my argument down in flames?

it is incredible how jws can ignore the camel of evidence that contradicts what they believe and then exult over the gnat of evidence that supports their view.

simwitness

gold_morning...

Many of your thoughts resonate within me. I have echoed them before to countless others.

For myself, this site serves as a sounding board, and a listening post to "undo" the the damage the WTBS has done. For some of us, it is very difficult to get past this.

Until I found this site a short time ago, I felt very alone in my thoughts, and felt I had no where to gather with others of "like mind". I am still getting used to the idea of posting here.

Getting outside the "box" that the WTBS puts us in requires much kicking, scratching and clawing. Ever watched a kitten escape from a cardboard box? Not a pretty site, but when it's out, boy it's out!.

I excaped many years ago, found the meaning of Christ while in the Air Force, was baptised, and since have moved beyond the need for "organized religion"... I have allways felt very secure in my beliefs, but never could quite "defend" them to the extent that some require. This site, and the many people here, have helped me to shore up my defenses.

(Some background, I studied in for apx 10 years, left (or went inactive) around 15-16. My Dad is an Elder, has been in for 25+ years, we have a strong relationship, but I know he wants me "in" and he of course believes the WTBS is the only "good" one out there, reguardless of past faults... Needless to say, with my recently discovered information, our conversations are "interesting...").

I know I have gone way off topic, but I have been needing to write this for some time now, and I thank you for listening.

On to the topic at hand:

1 sure "sign" that the WTBS is having serious issues is how "reactionary" they have become. Up until recently they rarely acknowleded the "Russell" years, and now they realize they HAVE TO. THe recent posts/quotes dealing with apostates, and the recent "If we knowingly lied we wouldnt..." stuff shows an incredible bit of reactionary stuff. This generally happens to anyone when they have been caught with thier pants down. Honest people usually never have to defend their actions....They may have to prove thier intent, or thier reasoning, but defense is usually not required.

Thanks again for listening...

24

WT 4-01-02 article

by DB in

jw
friends

in the april 1, 2002 issue of the watchtower, an article appears entitled "keep on serving jehovah with a steadfast heart".

paragraph 14 of this article states: "if jehovah's organization knowingly endorsed false teachings, advice to read the bible would never be given to jehovah's witnesses and those to whom they preach.".

i am withholding comment on this statement, because i'd like to hear from any who would like to post a response.

simwitness

They may "advise you to read the bible" in one instance, and then they tell you that only the GB or "annointed class" are the only ones qualified to interpit it.

also, "Knowingly endorsing false teachings" is a loaded statement altogether. They gloss over the falsehoods with "new light" and "in times past...".

They didn't know it was false at the time. They have tacked accordingly.

My issue, regaurdless of the interpetation changes, is that they knowingly falsify many things in thier teachings, from their own history to the words of others that they quote. Of this, there is no doubt.

...

26

how do we know when we interpretate correctly?

by evangelist in

i would like your help on this matter of the interpretation of the bible, because many people say we interpretate diffently and we have diffent understanding.

how do we know when we interpretate the bible correctly?.

i have a relative for instance says the gay sex life is ok and they interpretated the bible to back up the right to live a gay life.. how can i prove their interpretation is wrong?.

simwitness

JA,

I have read many of your recent posts, and have found many of them to be thought provoking, and generally well argued by yourself. However, this seems a bit of a stretch.

The word malakos appears four times in the Bible; three of the times it refers to softness of clothes; the other time it is appears in this passage, referring to an effeminate person, one who is soft is the feminine sense, in other words, gay.
Thus, it is clear that Paul is claiming that homosexual men will not enter the basileia theos (kingdom of God).

"Soft in the Feminine sense = homosexual" ?? And you make that leap by 3 other places where it refers to soft clothes?

I have not looked up the surrounding text for a complete contextual view, but it seems to me that if we are to "clothe ourselves in christ" then this could very well be reffering to one that is "weak" or "soft" in spirit as well.

just my 2 cents, no change expected!

132

Can any Witness possibly anwser this question?

by jerome in

hello all... i came across this line of questioning many months on the inet so i decided that i would submit just this once to peer pressure and make a usefull contribution to the board.. here is the question... is jesus just "a god?".

many of the regular inet surfers would have come across this line of questioning before so if you have you could just sit back and relax and read the replys.. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>.

me: so is he a 'lesser true god' or a 'lesser false god?'.

simwitness

All good points, simwitness, although if our knowledge of God comes from "within, without any outside influence", there will be as many gods as there are people.

thank you...
I want to clarify one thing...

I did not intend to say that "our knowledge of God comes solely from within", What I had intended to point out is that "our ability to know god comes from within". We certainly get "knowledge" from many external sources. The Bible is one such source.

IMHO, knowing God is much deeper than having knowledge of God. I also refuse to limit my ability to know God based on any single source of knowledge.

I learn something new everyday, but some things I know despite this.

(edited to clarify the clarification...)

26

how do we know when we interpretate correctly?

by evangelist in

i would like your help on this matter of the interpretation of the bible, because many people say we interpretate diffently and we have diffent understanding.

how do we know when we interpretate the bible correctly?.

i have a relative for instance says the gay sex life is ok and they interpretated the bible to back up the right to live a gay life.. how can i prove their interpretation is wrong?.

simwitness

It also says that we do not need a teacher to tell us what it says.

Adonai438, Where might I find this passage?

41

Will the WBTS order JW's to Kill??

by Anne Marie in

dear post reader,.

about nine months ago, while surfing through different jw web sites, i came across a reference to an e-mail that was sent to the poster.. the e-mail basically said that with the way that things are going with the society, i.e., so many " waking up", and not being so easy to mislead and control., that there very likely will be a "big" announcement regarding the order to kill the "apostates" and the "wicked people".. the source said that it would go something like this:.

there would be talks, and some wordings in the magazines, alluding to an upcoming announcement.

simwitness

Murder may be in the 10 Commandments, but is not totally un-scriptural. (There are many examples where folks murdered in God's name and were not punished).

*** Nov 15, 1952 Watchtower ***
Questions from Readers
· In the case of where a father or mother or son or daughter is disfellowshiped, how should such person be treated by members of the family in their family relationship?-P. C., Ontario, Canada.
We are not living today among theocratic nations where such members of our fleshly family relationship could be exterminated for apostasy from God and his theocratic organization, as was possible and was ordered in the nation of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai and in the land of Palestine. "Thou shalt surely kill him; thy hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him to death with stones, because he hath sought to draw thee away from Jehovah thy God, . . . And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is in the midst of thee."-Deut. 13:6-11, AS.
Being limited by the laws of the worldly nation in which we live and also by the laws of God through Jesus Christ, we can take action against apostates only to a certain extent, that is, consistent with both sets of laws. The law of the land and God's law through Christ forbid us to kill apostates, even though they be members of our own flesh-and-blood family relationship. However, God's law requires us to recognize their being disfellowshiped from his congregation, and this despite the fact that the law of the land in which we live requires us under some natural obligation to live with and have dealings with such apostates under the same roof.
(there's more to this quote, you can get it at the quotes site)

So, new light could be introduced that would say "killing is ok".

However, like many have previously stated, I personally do not think it will happen.

.....

132

Can any Witness possibly anwser this question?

by jerome in

hello all... i came across this line of questioning many months on the inet so i decided that i would submit just this once to peer pressure and make a usefull contribution to the board.. here is the question... is jesus just "a god?".

many of the regular inet surfers would have come across this line of questioning before so if you have you could just sit back and relax and read the replys.. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>.

me: so is he a 'lesser true god' or a 'lesser false god?'.

simwitness

These translators were representatives of churches that embraced the Nicene Creed and so, presumably, trinitarians themselves.

Are you aware of the full history of the "Nicene Creed" and how Constantine modified what the original church fathers intended?

A short quote from the article:

The Council of Nicaea
The Council of Nicaea is the model for all church councils which followed. Almost 300 bishops and important clerics attended, "including all those who had taken part in the Arian controversy to date" Hosius of Cordova presided, and Constantine attended. Arius was present as an observer, and his defenders were Eusebius of Nicomedia and Eusebius of Caesarea. On the opposing side were Alexander of Alexandria and Athanasius, supported by Eustathius of Antioch and Hosius -- all bitterly opposed to Arius personally. Strangely enough, the Christian church may have remained intact if it was not for the interference of Constantine. Early in the council, "Eusebius of Caesarea introduced a carefully worded creed, based on Scripture, that neither affirmed nor denied Arius' views. No one could object to anything in it, and Constantine praised it." This original creed would have ended the Arian Controversy and brought stability to the Christian church. But Constantine showed his instability, and under the influence of Hosius, the emperor proposed to add to the creed the term "homoousios" (Gk. of the same substance) implying in a sense that the Son and Father were like two pieces of wood cut from the same tree. This one word ruined the compromise creed created by the council, and excluded Arius' views entirely; it also opened itself up to Sabellianism, a previously condemned heresy. Criticisms were raised that the word did not exist anywhere in the Scriptures; but since the emperor was the one who proposed it, "scarcely anyone felt able to speak against it" [14]. Constantine proceeded to threaten exile for anyone who refused to sign the new creed, and all but three did. Arius and two others refused to sell out to Constantine's new creed and were condemned by the council and exiled accordingly. The Council then proceeded to deal with the case of the Melitius, set rules for calculating the date of Easter, recognized the patriarchal office of the bishops of Alexandria and Antioch, and decided several minor issues.

(taken from http://www.deism.com/counterrebuttal2.htm.

Now, why bring this up? To my earlier point: Man has tried for THOUSANDS of years to "mold God" into an image that he (man) can explain or deal with.

1 example:
1. When Man needed an excuse to rape/pilage/destroy others, they claimed rightousness in the site of God, and God was written as a vengful/Powerful "protector of his chosen people" God.(Most of the OT as applied to the Isrealites many wars).

My point:
One's knowledge of God cannot be solely based on writings of any kind. It must come from "within". If God created us in his image, then we must have the ability to "know god" without any outside influence. (I guess it is another thing to prove it)

The writings that we are debating are 3 things:
1. Dated. 1900+ years old. One wonders why there is nothing more recent.
2. Written from a completely different culture,life experience and languuage. ->Leaves everything open to debate when it comes to translation and interpertation
3. Man has had his hand in it deciding what was/wasn't inspired. I am sure it would come as a surprise to many that the books of Revelations and Acts (among others) were not considered inspired writings by many of the early "fathers", but were included by vote.

.....

132

Can any Witness possibly anwser this question?

by jerome in

hello all... i came across this line of questioning many months on the inet so i decided that i would submit just this once to peer pressure and make a usefull contribution to the board.. here is the question... is jesus just "a god?".

many of the regular inet surfers would have come across this line of questioning before so if you have you could just sit back and relax and read the replys.. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>.

me: so is he a 'lesser true god' or a 'lesser false god?'.

simwitness

whats a god cubed?

What every single "revealed" religion attempts to do to God, "box" him into their very own "we are right, you are wrong" definition.

God is what god is. Allways has been, allways will be. Only man would attempt to limit this in any way, shape or FORM.

--- it's time to think outside of the box!

2

a question about the "annointed" and ...

by simwitness in

can someone help me understand the chronology of the "144,000" doctrine of the wtbs?.

what i am looking for is quotes/pointers to the publications about:.

1. how they decided who was of this "special" class.. 2. when the cuttoff point was for being part of it.

simwitness

Can someone help me understand the chronology of the "144,000" doctrine of the WTBS?

What I am looking for is quotes/pointers to the publications about:

1. How they decided who was of this "special" class.
2. When the cuttoff point was for being part of it. (I think it is 1935, but am not sure)
3. How a person "knows" or "proves" they are of the annointed.

I am wondering what the WTBS will do when it can no longer "prove" that it's GB can possibly be from this class, and what kind of new light will be provided for this.

As other's have pointed out, the more recent books/magazines have a "lack" of material in them... wondering how the WTBS will deal with it.

Thanks!