Posts by Linda14

19

Are Jehovah's Witnesses who are disfellowshipped allowed to communicate and comfort each other while waiting to be reinstated?

by Vanderhoven7 in

i just read about a disfellowshipped person who was looking for other disfellowshipped persons to socialize with.

what does the org have to say about this?.

Linda14

The disfellowshiping policy is cruel and mean. Let Jehovah judge them for their chasing away His worshipers. Well, worship of God has no link with the watchtower. You worship God in spirit and truth.

63

Jerusalem will be trampled by the nations until the Gentile Times are Fulfilled. — Luke 21:24

by Fisherman in

jerusalem will be trampled by the nations until the gentile times are fulfilled.

— luke 21:24 .

the bible book of luke records jesus prophecy of the last day with his parousia including the verse about the gentile times.

When has the word "Jerusalem" been figuratively referred to as rulership? The WT is saying that they word "Jerusalem" in the Luke refers to Davidic line of rulers. Granted, that city is the capital where rulers sat, and those were said to seat on Jehovah's throne, but for the meaning the WT associates with that Book of Luke to make sense, there has to be a place in the bible where the word "Jerusalem" would figuratively mean rulership. If not, changing the word Jerusalem in Luke to mean davidic line of rulers would not make sense. There is simply no basis for that.

So Luke 21:24 is about the city Jerusalem. That it will be trampled on... Destroyed by the Nations. That statement makes sense since Jesus is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem. Jerusalem was not by then in ruins, hence the foretold trampling/destruction.

69

Did Jesus COME with the clouds of heaven in 1914?

by Fisherman in

take for example revelation 21: 10. .

“….and he showed me the holy city jerusalem coming down out of heaven from god.

here john sees something happening, action.

Linda14

Christs coming as stated at Matt 24:30 is the same as Matt 24:3. That is the sign of his presence Jesus was talking about. When perhaps that heavenly quaking starts happening, that's the sign that the son of man has come, his presence. Some activities would happen during this presence period. The sign of Christs presence is the same as the "end" and also the "conclusion of the system of things". Watchtower is overloading this 1914 with a whole lot.

When Jesus starts his kingdom, he will rule the world, he won't be sharing rulership with worldly government. See how the bible puts it.

15 The seventh angel blew his trumpet. And there were loud voices in heaven, saying: “The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever.”

If Jesus became king in 1914, then he is now the ruler of the world, and not Satan. Revelation from 11:17 states that judgment will follow that rulership.

It should also be noted that contrary to what watchtower teach, the throne of David was not vacant when Jesus came in the first century. In fact, Jesus made a triumphant entry into Jerusalem as a king in fulfillment of the book of Zechariah. So the seat was not vacant. He was even born a king. Dan 9:5-10. When asked by Pilate, Jesus didn't say "well I am not a king". Jesus metaphysically agreed that he was a king, but that his kingdom is not of this world. In his torture stake, it was posted "king of the Jews".

So watchtower is wrong by saying that the throne of David was vacant till 1914. Jesus first kingship was not expected to last forever. He was expected to be killed. That didn't mean he was never a king. To Jehovah he has fulfilled an aspect of the prophesy meant for that period. The next will come when he takes over rulership from worldly rulers, then rule the world.

28

Should Jehovah's Witnesses Trust the Governing Body?

by Vanderhoven7 in

if there is evidence that jesus invisibly chose specific men at headquarters in brooklyn new york in 1919 to be his faithful slave and that mandate and ability passed on to future directors...then the answer might just be a resounding maybe.. what is the evidence for this invisible appointment and what is the evidence that this is just watchtower mythology?.

i hope jws like scholar and fisherman will explain why the trust the gb.. i must be honest, i see no evidence at all to put trust in either the 1919 selection or the current men taking the lead in warwick.

.

Linda14

It is very doubtful that Jehovah chose the GB in 1919 as the only channel on earth as they claim. I can only say that God would save honest hearted people in all Jesus believing Churches, the JWs inclusive. Some among the GB might be sincere, and might get God's approval individually. The same with all Jehovah's witnesses and all church goers and church leaders. There is that possibility.

However, their stating that God uses them exclusively, you're the only channel, even makes me wonder if God would ever save any with that mentality. Why? Because that is blasphemy to state that the holy spirit led you to one teaching, and later pronouncing the earlier teaching the holy spirit led you to as falsehood. Even saying that you are God's only channel on earth is bogus. It carries serious consequences if Jehovah truly didn't tell you that. And the reasons for making such a bogus claim is too weak. Sometimes I wonder if these guys think it's a joke.

It is doubtful, and I would have said totally impossible for God to choose a group from among the rest without letting them know that fact DIVINELY. Jehovah would have communicated such either through a vision, miraculous works, dreams, angel appearance, fulfilled prophecies etc. When God did that in the first century, he openly supplied abundant miracles to prove that He has shifted His attention from Judaism to Christianity.

When God chose a prophet, He always makes it's clear to the one he chose.

The WT would have been better had they gone on with providing meeting materials for any group that wishes to get those materials, and not forming another religion. If God has not appeared to you, you shouldn't form a religion without his approval. That would be presumptuousness. No matter how bad the Christianity has become, you can do your worship in your house, and not go as far as forming a religion.

Well, we leave God to judge them, but I can only trust my Bible. There is no reason to even trust them. They have a track record of doctrinal errors. Why trust such a group to define what you believe?

11

Salvation: Faith alone OR works?

by JW Answers in

jehovah's witnesses run to the book of james staying that faith without works is dead.

they completely ignore the teachings of paul and hold onto james.

.. it would appear that there is a contradiction between james' teaching and paul's teaching, yet the bible tells us to rightly divide the word of truth.

Linda14

Faith basically. Works is essential as well but what gives you salvation is not that work, but faith.

Think of that criminal at the stake/cross. What saved him? Works? No, just faith in Jesus.

Think about those whom Jesus told when he was on earth, "your sins have been forgiven". That means had the kingdom come that day, they will be saved. What saved them, works? No. Faith.

What about many persons that were baptized those days, they didn't live many years studying What Does The Bible Really Teach book and then having their lives policed to determine if they are repentant before they were baptized. All they needed was to believe in Jesus and state that they have repented, they were baptized. In the case of Cornelius and those invited for the occasion, they received the holy spirit immediately. Don't imagine that those were spotless.

Works are essential, but nothing can deter God from declaring any sinner righteous and beckon him to the kingdom through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus. Nothing. So it's not good to think that one can earn salvation which works seem to emphasize. Neither would it be fine to deliberately become wicked in words and action and think that just having faith in Jesus will cover you. No.

7

Can a Church Lie Intentionally? Yes.

by peacefulpete in

a very recent case i mentioned briefly in another thread might be of interest to many here.

a mormon found through the internet that her church leadership had deliberately misled members regarding the origin of the book of mormon and engaged in historical revisioning.

she sued for damages for the lifelong tithing she had been deceived into giving.

Linda14

The JW GB know they lie many times, but they think that if they do with the permission of the greater number of GB, that the public or their members are not entitled to that truth. So it's not a lie, but a restriction of what you're not entitled to.

For example, if the GB vote on a policy or a doctrine, and greater number says that Policy A or Doctrine A should be adopted, the other members of the GB and even all JWs would speak that doctrine or policy as the ONLY truth revealed by Jehovah. That doctrine would be accorded all the zeal and implementation given to any teaching. Even if you re a GB member who disagrees with the doctrine, you will still call it truth and speak about it as if there is no other truth available. And even judge other churches that teach a different doctrine.

There is a culture of lies embedded in the doctrines of JWs, and it is successful because if you ever tell something different in public, you will be disfellowshiped as an apostate. That coerces you into accepting falsehood. You can only pray that tomorrow you have a greater vote in the GB to overturn the earlier doctrine.

The witnesses have a different definition of lies. So yes, JW are a good example of organization that intentionally tell lies.

14

How many doubt the GB official teaching about who will survive

by Indoubtbigtime in

i wonder how many have doubts about the gb teaching that only baptised jws would survive the big a?

even then they still only say you may make it as with unbaptised kids of jdubs.

i think most people physically in don’t agree with the gb on this and are hoping jehovah would let other good people into the new world even if they are not baptised jws.

Linda14

The basic requirement for salvation is faith in Jesus Christ. God doesn't check if you're 100% in your doctrinal understanding before you get saved.

20

How do JWs know that millions who were martyred as Christians before the 20th century did not have the heavenly hope?

by Vanderhoven7 in

as i understand it, jehovah’s witnesses believe less than 145,000 faithful christians existed prior to the twentieth century.

the other sheep christians did not start forming until after 1914. that means jehovah’s witnesses view millions martyred for their faith in christ prior to the 20th century as merely professed christians.. the question is…how do witnesses know that those millions who perished for their faith in christ were not christians at all?.

Linda14

That teaching obviously doesn't make any sense. This is one of the many teachings they will one day discard.

One of the major problem WT has is this 1914 nonsense. There are lots of doctrine pinned to that date. Until they remove that nonsense called 1914, they won't breath a fresh air.

Imagine, for over one thousand years now, God has not been able to get 144000 persons, but in relatively short time, the number of great crowd has numbered into the millions. Yet the standard of righteousness is still the same. Even the number that were available during the first century alone would probably get close to that 144000.

The 144000 likely refers to all true christians that would be saved during Armageddon. It is a symbol for all true christians during that time.

With time, the unreasonableness of that doctrine would gain greater vote among the GB members and they will change it. Don't be surprised that not all GB members or even those in HQ believe that teaching. JWs encourage hypocrisy, and love for organization more than love for bible truth. It's a sad reality.

349

Who really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?

by Godlyman in

if anyone were to come up to you claiming that they are the faithful and discreet slave, how would you go about proving them to be false, based upon scripture?.

estephan.

Linda14

Yes. The basic requirement for salvation is faith is Jesus. That is basic. God doesn't expect those He uses to understand all his word for He to save them. No. If that were so, no single soul from WT will be saved because from day one, they had always had false doctrine, even now.

GB keep making that claim, "correct doctrine = salvation." But that's not true, even John the Baptist didn't understand all the scripture had to say about his work nor that of Christ.

Jesus Christ told the criminal at his right, that he will be with him in paradise. Why? His works, better understanding of bible? No. Just faith in Jesus.

Jesus also declared some sinners in his time as forgiving. It means that if God kingdom were to come at that time, those persons he forgave their sins will enter as righteous persons.

So since Jesus is the judge, you can't know whom he will allow into the kingdom. The Pharisees were so much attached to rules rules rules like the GB, shutting the kingdom of heaven, and disfellowshiping people because of their rules.

Even making complicated requirements for baptism. I mean, seriously? Did Jesus require long hours of study before people were baptized? I bet you that no army officer would ever be baptized today, but Cornelius was a high ranking military officer who got baptized. No need for days or months of return visits and bible study. what about the Jailer? And after the baptism, he didn't need hours of brainwashing, to wash off teachings of Judaism. Like WT would want to wash off Christendom teachings, some of which are even correct. Too over righteous to a fault. And God never even tell any of them divinely, that he has appointed them. I wonder how the Org would have been had they received a seconds of supernatural appearance!

No matter how bad Catholic or Eastern Orthodox had been, you do not have any right to establish your own church unless you were told divinely to do so (assuming they were the remaining link to the first church). You can choose to be bible students to study and learn God's word, but do not establish another religion. If God is tired, He will divinely appoint you. Then you have your authority. The Jews were very bad, but God didn't reject them. If any had formed another nation then, God won't approve it.

I mean, one need to be careful, and many churches are just like that. If one is tired, stay in your house, read your bible and practice it. Worship of God is in spirit and truth. Don't form a religion.

349

Who really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?

by Godlyman in

if anyone were to come up to you claiming that they are the faithful and discreet slave, how would you go about proving them to be false, based upon scripture?.

estephan.

Linda14

Scholar

How does that 1914 make sense? Maybe you can help me with this questions.

Luke 21:

However, when you see Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies, then know that the desolating of her has drawn near. 21 Then let those in Ju·deʹa begin fleeing to the mountains, let those in the midst of her leave, and let those in the countryside not enter into her, 22 because these are days for meting out justice in order that all the things written may be fulfilled. 23 Woe to the pregnant women and those nursing a baby in those days! For there will be great distress on the land and wrath against this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled"

From that context, how does Jerusalem come to represent seat of davidic line of rulers? Is the context not clearly referring to literal Jerusalem?

2. Who said that the seat of davidic rulership was vacant as at first century? Was Jesus not born a king through David line? Did Jesus not make a triumphant entry into Jerusalem as the king of the Jews? Did Nathanael, and even the Jewish rulers not place on his stake, "Jesus, king of the Jews"? (John 12:15,16; Isaiah 9;5,6) Zech 9:9 didn't present the matter as king designate. There king was coming into Jerusalem.

When declaration to lift the turban was made at Ezek 21:26, the bible didn't say " let seven times pass over it". That phrase was picked up from another prophecy meant for Nebuchadnezzar. That is entirely different context. That of Nebuchadnezzar fulfilled on Nebuchadnezzar. The bible book of Daniel told us the prophecy and stated how it was fulfilled. done and dusted.

Another problem is giving the seven times a different reckoning. On what basis actually? How does adding up different biblical context make any sense?

3. We go to revelation 12.

This chapter is used to prove how the kingdom was born. The child is said to be God's kingdom. A government.

First. Rev 12:17 says that the dragon went to persecute "the remaining ones" of the woman's offspring.

If the remaining ones of her offspring are persons, how then is the child the woman delivered not also refer to a person, but a government?

Secondly, verse 10 says "now have come to pass... the kingdom"

Did you notice that it was after the war in heaven that the point was made that it was now, that the kingdom came into being?

So the kingdom should come into being after Satan was ousted, not before.

We move to Rev 11.

The GB made a smart move there. Rev 11:15 is said to fulfill in 1914, but why is it that verse 18 was moved to the future? Russell and others who studied that Revelation knew that those verses should come together, that's why they thought that the kingdom will come in 1914. But since it didn't come, the verses were detached and given different times of fulfillment. That's wrong.

As for Parousia, it will take time to explain how my personal study gave a different understanding of that scripture. In a nutshell, Jesus answered the question of the sign of his presence at Matt 24:29,30- "the sign of the son of man". probably that heavenly phenomenon mentioned in verse 29 will be the physical evidence that the son of man has come. that's the sign requested at Matt 24:3. This his coming/presence would cover a period of resurrection and rapture before the actual destruction of the wicked.

All that Jesus said about nation fighting against nations, food shortages etc was not part of his presence. He was telling them what will occur before his presence. His presence is the end. The end is associated with when Jesus come for judgment and eventual destruction. In other words, conclusion of the system of things. That visible evidence will show that he is NEAR at the door. (Matt 24:33). Jesus didn't now say "the end is not yet" because that was the end. Don't let the word "end" make you think of immediate destruction.

To help you get the point, run a study on "presence", "manifest*", "Reve*lation", "trumpet", "conclusion", "end".