so my hubby wanted to go to church yesterday.
it was a non-denominational one in the town next to ours.
i went along because he feels he needs a church to attend to keep him on the right track.
Wow, I've never heard of that kind of thing before. Seriously, I wonder where you live??
I totally agree that if you don't feel comfortable and they aren't budging... that is one UNFRIENDLY and UNINVITING church and you have lost nothing by leaving.
I would feel tempted to write to the church office and complain. Let 'em have it. They need to hear it.
bebu
do jehovah's witnesses believe in two gods or one god?
do they believe in a "duality"?
do jehovah's witnesses and/or the angels worship jesus christ?.
So any “worship” the angels give God’s Son is relative and is directed through him to Jehovah.
And wouldn't that work the same way with humans, then? If not, why not?
bebu
Edited to clarify: I do think that Jesus is an extension/interface of the Father, and not just a created agent/angel that helps the Father out.
Drew, thanks for sharing that thought. I think the willingness to search and follow God, wherever it leads, is a type of faith in His goodwill.
i don't believe in prayer now, but i could be wrong so would you give some good vibes for my grandson?
he is 16 and they discovered a big growth on his lymph node near his heart and will operate on him monday afternoon.
it could be cancer but i sure hope it isn't.
Ken, I am very sorry to hear this new bit of bad news.
Immediately after I post this, I will be taking time to pray for your grandson and you; specifically, that God will see him thru this surgery, and will help you both personally in any/all other ways you need (whether you know them or not).
God bless and keep you both.......
bebu
i went to see someone in my old hall last night, who's recently been diagnosed with cancer.
she's only in her late 40s, healthy, so this was a shock when i found out about it the other night.
apparently it's gone in to her liver and her doctor has not given her any hope of surviving it, although they're going for a second opinion, as the doctors in our area are notoriously incompetent.. even though i stopped going to the meeting 2 years ago, i thought going to see her was the human thing to do, since she studied with me when i was 15 years old and i thought it would maybe be comforting for her to talk to someone else who had had cancer.
They treat mourning and grieving as a sin. What do they make of Jesus' words, "blessed are those who mourn"? Or Paul's admonition that Christians were to mourn with those who mourn and rejoice with those who rejoice? Grief is not inherently evil.
I'm sorry for your friend's situation. I hope she will get better. I hope you are feeling alright too, Mary.
bebu
what a ride it has been!.
i was [and had been for a full year] sure that leaving the jw's was the right thing to do, before i showed up here.
still, the journey was just underway then, and this forum has been a wonderful aid in that journey.. i remember the first few weeks, when i discovered that some of the posters here [mouthy, jst2laws and his wife (joysabelle i think)] had aided me earlier thru emails in the first of my earliest contacts, before i knew of jwd.
Congrats Jeff!! I have always enjoyed your posts so much. You've got such a great perspective and a wonderful, big heart--all despite what the hard efforts of the WTS. Your g-kids are gonna bless this world, because of your influence.
Hugs to you and wifey,
bebu
he has a gi bleed.
they were unable to find any bleeding in his stomach today.
so tomorrow, they will be doing a colonoscopy.
((((MsD & Hubby))))
I really hope things will get better for him soon, and that the bleeding stops completely. You really have had more than your fair share of trials! My prayers go out to you both.
bebu
from reflecting on what paul writes in his letters, it is obvious he had never taught anything like the wts doctrines concerning the little flock (144,000) or the slave class, or any other unique jw gospel concept.
yet he was clear that he was preaching the entire gospel everywhere.. i picked out the following verses (you can find more but these are the most obvious) to show that 1) paul said his authority for the gospel he preached was given by god; 2) that he preached the gospel fully; and that he condemned any person or angel who preached a different gospel.
have you ever noticed, then, that though paul clarified the gospel in all of his letters in a variety of ways, the odd doctrines of the jws/wts were never once mentioned by paul?
Ah, you don't know how mean "higher critics" are these days...
Actually I'm not at all surprised, but I still hold to the "lower critics".
bebu
from reflecting on what paul writes in his letters, it is obvious he had never taught anything like the wts doctrines concerning the little flock (144,000) or the slave class, or any other unique jw gospel concept.
yet he was clear that he was preaching the entire gospel everywhere.. i picked out the following verses (you can find more but these are the most obvious) to show that 1) paul said his authority for the gospel he preached was given by god; 2) that he preached the gospel fully; and that he condemned any person or angel who preached a different gospel.
have you ever noticed, then, that though paul clarified the gospel in all of his letters in a variety of ways, the odd doctrines of the jws/wts were never once mentioned by paul?
He then says " now, James - how many Lambs are there here? One, right? So that is a LITERAL one Lamb! Now, how many 144,000 are there? So, that is a literal 144,000, right ?"
I kid you not.
I, of course, looked at him after a pointed silence, and asked "so, you are saying that Christ is LITERALLY a LAMB ?"
James, that is a VERY funny story! What a perfect reply from you!!
Hi Narkissos! I was counting on you to show up.
While he does not speculate on Jesus' body "dissolving in gases" he apparently knows of no "empty tomb" story either.
But surely Paul must have been familiar with the empty tomb story even though he did not elaborate in the ways of the gospel writers, since he spent time with the apostles (esp Peter and James, and later more of them at the council. (Gal 1 and 2, Acts 15). I don't think it strange that he does not repeat an "empty tomb" story, but merely refers to it in general. Was Christ buried somewhere other than a tomb, according to Paul? I have never seen anything to adequately convince me of that.
Btw... if Protestants and Catholics share the Apostles Creed (which is veryshort!), then I think that the "full gospel" should logically be found somehow in that. "Full" does not therefore appear to mean exhaustive so much as primary. It seems to have been used as a summary of doctrines for baptismal candidates in Rome. For those unfamiliar with it:
http://www.creeds.net/ancient/apostles.htm
...Thanks for all your comments! Anyone else...?
bebu
from reflecting on what paul writes in his letters, it is obvious he had never taught anything like the wts doctrines concerning the little flock (144,000) or the slave class, or any other unique jw gospel concept.
yet he was clear that he was preaching the entire gospel everywhere.. i picked out the following verses (you can find more but these are the most obvious) to show that 1) paul said his authority for the gospel he preached was given by god; 2) that he preached the gospel fully; and that he condemned any person or angel who preached a different gospel.
have you ever noticed, then, that though paul clarified the gospel in all of his letters in a variety of ways, the odd doctrines of the jws/wts were never once mentioned by paul?
abbagail, I personally hold my views with a light grip. I've learned that esp. with Revelation, there are lots of plausible viewpoints (but none of them include the WTS's).
santismo, whatever your personal view of Paul is, the point of this thread is that the 144,000 and other unique JW doctrines are not reflected in any of his letters (whether you accept them or not). Especially in light of his several comments about preaching the full gospel of Christ, he doesn't show even a faint awareness of any of the concepts that are central to the JWs' gospel. There are no allusions, nothing.
Another loudly missing doctrine is that 'Jesus' body dissipated into gases'. There is nothing, no word or concept at all, to indicate this was ever Paul's belief or in his gospel. Is it plausible at all to think that Paul's audience, when hearing him preach that "Christ had died and rose again", ALL of them immediately understood: "Oh! Jesus died and his body became gases and his spirit went into another body... and that is the one that Paul saw"? --That's a ton of content in Paul's simple phrase "Jesus died and rose again." And did his audience also hear from Paul that Michael was Jesus' alter ego? Michael is never mentioned by name even once by Paul. That omission also speaks volumes.
Again, my point is: if the JWs pride themselves on following the Bible, and believe that their teaching is the same as what was originally preached (that is, uncorrupted), then why does Paul show no sign of ever teaching what they teach?
bebu
i was in the witnesses in my twenties and one time i was over at a house of a woman who needed some help.
we were cleaning her house, making her some meals and so on.
all this was to make her life easier, while she dealt with some things in here life.
Even if they would df the dead, another issue is that it's her word alone. Was there any other evidence or another person to corroborate?
I like the points raised by abandoned.
bebu
