this is just the text of this article, comments will follow in a nother posting.
then dishonor will come; but wisdom is with the modest ones.
moses too was modest and humble.
From Strongs:
02611 chaneph {khaw-nafe'}hmmmm.... Apostate not listed as a definition.....hmmmmmm......And that word does not appear in the NT.from 02610; TWOT - 696b; adj
AV - hypocrite 13; 13
1) hypocritical, godless, profane, hypocrite, irreligious
this is just the text of this article, comments will follow in a nother posting.
then dishonor will come; but wisdom is with the modest ones.
moses too was modest and humble.
Proverbs 11:9 says (KJV from http://www.blueletterbible.com)
An hypocrite with [his] mouth destroyeth his neighbour: but through knowledge shall the just be delivered.A few other translations use "the godless man" instead of hypocrite.
If you're quoting something, shouldn't you quote CORRECTLY????
as i mentioned before in previous posts i'm trying to prepare myself for an exit of the borg.
so what i've been doing over the last few days is thinking of ways to counter the questions that i know will be directed to me.
in particular how would you go about responding to the following questions?.
dedalus said:
Sorry, but no. I try to avoid talking with Witnesses about the Bible, because they only hear the verses they want to hear, in the way they want to hear them. Plus I don't believe in the Bible, and if perchance that comes out, I'd be really screwed.This is very true.
Leander:
All of the arguments given to you will help to prove your point, but only if you can stick to your guns on them. I would stick with "inconsistancy" in thier teaching instead of trying to prove one thing or the other as wrong/false. Look for the "shifting sands"... where would you want your house built? on the sand or on the rock? The "shifting sands" on core teachings are probably more important than anything else, especially if you can show "back and forth" messages. Use the "Alpha and Omega" Revelation stuff to show that they can't keep the teachings straight.
I also think that Luke 21:8 is extremely powerful... but as you have pointed out about the "false prophet" bit, they will most likely say that it "does'nt apply to us".
Most likely they will ask you if you accept the WTBS as the F&DS. Your answer to that question is what they will "judge" you on.
i'd like to make a few points which i know i will be eaten alive for, but here goes...... is there really a devil?.
history of religion has always believed in the devil, but has portrayed him in different lights....he himself transforms into an angel of light, making something that is evil seem innocent and fun.
his best ploy: having people believe he don't exist...this is to his own advantage.. he is a malignant enemy of god and man!
Violet...
(I realize this may be useless, but I have to answer your question)
You said:
Where does it mention the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society in that scripture? Don't interpretations belong to God?Luke 21:8 says: (quoted from http://www.blueletterbible.com, KJV)
And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am [Christ]; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.I did not interpet anything, I left it to you to interpet. You're response indicates 1 of 2 things:
I personally do not feel that that particular scripture leaves anything open to interpetation.
You also said:
By their fruits you will know them and if you have love among yerselves....well the true religion definitely ain't you lot, yer all miserable so and so's....When did we EVER claim to be a religion? To the best of my knowledge no one here has ever made that claim. If anything, the majority of us here realize that there is no "true religion" but only honest faith.
Secondly, if you ask 10 people (not JW or x-JW) on the street what "fruits" the WTBS has, I will bet that you will not get the answer you expect.
Again, follow you heart, and if you have doubts, patience will reveal all.
Do you have doubts? If so, they usually mean something, and you need to explore them.
i'd like to make a few points which i know i will be eaten alive for, but here goes...... is there really a devil?.
history of religion has always believed in the devil, but has portrayed him in different lights....he himself transforms into an angel of light, making something that is evil seem innocent and fun.
his best ploy: having people believe he don't exist...this is to his own advantage.. he is a malignant enemy of god and man!
VioletAnai,
I understand your frustration, and you have every right to feel it. Having never posted to you before, and I have only "skimmed" most of the posts that were directed to you, I can say only this:
The fact that the members of this board converse with you even after you "decide" to pursue the WTBS is evidence of their caring for you. THey may be overzealous at times (aren't we all?) but it shows that they want you to make an informed decision.
Now, contrast that with what will happen if you _ever_ question the WTBS.
Whatever decision you make, just make sure you make it for the right reasons.
It is obvious that you desire to serve God "the right way", and you feel that "Jehovah's Organization" is that "way". I do not share that view.
You have to decide this for yourself. Asking people here to support you in joining the WTBS is asking for some of the responses you have gotten, they are honest responses from people who have LEFT the WTBS for various reasons.
Follow your heart, ask for guidance, and study ALL available information, not just what the WTBS publishes.
Riddle me this:
What was Jesus warning to the follower's at Luke 21:8?
How does that apply to the WTBS? (or _does_ it?)
i'd like to make a few points which i know i will be eaten alive for, but here goes...... is there really a devil?.
history of religion has always believed in the devil, but has portrayed him in different lights....he himself transforms into an angel of light, making something that is evil seem innocent and fun.
his best ploy: having people believe he don't exist...this is to his own advantage.. he is a malignant enemy of god and man!
Definition of an apostate?
Just compare the teachings of the WTBS over the years...
Rutherford was the first, he rejected all he was taught by Russell (Who cares if it dealt with Pyramids!)
Then comes Knorr/Franz who reject most of what Rutherford "taught", and they needed the help of "spiritists" to prove stuff...
Now, the latest folks have gone and rejected 90 years (or so) of what the freakin' word "Generation" means....
SO, who is an apostate? those that question, or those that follow men instead of God?
why didn't god wait a couple of days.... to send jesus down here.
if, as jws believe, a thousand years is but a day to jehovah - literally - then if he would have waited a couple of days, imagine the media coverage jesus could've had if he were here today.
what a way to get the message of salvation out - if you had real live coverage and verifiable proof of a man performing the sorts of things that bible writers claim jesus did wow!
I think miracles happen everyday, but go unnoticed.
yup...
It's all about focus...
did you know it is against the law to say the word prayer out loud on an airplane?
i was watching tv last night and this man was nearly arrested.
he has been a christian for over 30 years.. he was on an airplane here in the united states, with his wife and another friend.
I don't pray on take-off, I pray before landing!
(Think of it this way, if you never get off the ground, you have a real good chance of surviving a crash, but once you are off the ground, chances of surviving a "bad" landing are not so good.)
:)
quick question: .
they say 1914 is the date when the end begins or something like that?
they also say that within the lifetime of that generation armageddon will come.
Keep in mind that the WTBS can not simply change the 1914 date.
2 reasons:
1. If they back off of the 607 date, too many "apostates" will be proved correct, and there is way too much in current print to easily sweep away.
2. the 1914 date is central to their teaching that Christ appointing them the F&DS in 1918(?) if they change the 1914, then they would have to change that as well, and they would lose even more ground. Couple that with the "Annointed class" in 1935(?) and you know the days are numbered for their chronology.
It never ceases to amaze me... and why they choose to ignore Luke 21:8:
He replied: Watch out that you are not decieved. For many will comie in my name, claiming, "I am he" and "the time is near", Do not follow them.And, just what, have the WTBS been doing since thier very beginning?
Oh, that's right, they got "specail" permission....
been wondering about this lately.... what proof (outside the bible, of course) do we have for the "historical jesus"?.
in my earlier days (post jw to "born again christian") i remember reading that the one thing that differentiates christianity vs. "all the others" was that we had secular historical proof that there was a man that was called jesus, who died on a cross and was resurrected.
now i am wondering just what that proof is/was?
Valis: Thanks for the links. I am actually not looking for "answers" or to form an opinion.
My point for the post:
To start a conversation based on the "other" aspect of christianity. There have been numerous posts recently debvating the biblical nature of Jesus, I thought it would be interesting to discuss the historical nature. Since, as I pointed out before, it was what made Christianity the "real" religion, our prophet was resurected, there's was not.
The "Josephus" writings are what was pointed to as "proof" to me many years ago, but I could not remember the actual references until now.
Kennesen:
For those who do not believe in Jesus, no amountI simply do not agree with this statement.
of proof will convince you, and for those who believe, no proof
is necessary.
a) Thomas did not "believe" until it was proved to him that it was Jesus.
b) Those that already believe, extra "proof" never hurts, in fact it often helps (see above).
...
