I test them on how biblically sound they are and Jehovah's witnesses win hands down.
Please provide your proof here. For example let's take the trinity, do you know if God is a trinity or not 100% certain?
Sure there are scriptures of Jesus saying that the Father is greater than he is, but then there are also scripture that say Jesus had emptied himself and that he and the father am one. Then there are scriptures where Paul refers to God and Christ using the same word.
So the question becomes which is more biblically sound, the interpretation that throws out three scriptures, throws out four scriptures, ignores certain translations of the ancient Greek, etc.
Another example would be something like the Great Crowd, we're supposed to believe that they are on Earth because they're described in one scripture as being at God's footstool which in another scripture is correlated to Earth. We have to ignore a scripture that says literally they are in heaven and ignore another scripture that the four living creatures are at God's footstool as well.
If you want to judge on prophecy predictions alone that is your choice but most Christian religions don't even try to use the Bible chronology or prophecies anymore. They simply ignore them. To be honest Armageddon is a very uncomfortable fit with the "we get judged and either all goto heaven or hell when we die" doctrine which would render Armageddon superfluous.
I don't judge on prophesy predictions, I barely mention it in this video. What does the bible say about those who say "the end is near", if you check in the Emphat Diaglett (which I'm sure I misspelled I've been up with a sick 2 year old) Matt 24:5 actually says "There will be those who say they're ANOINTED, do not go after them". The whole chapter is about groups that say do not go after people saying the end is close because they are wrong. Think about the scripture where it says "They will say he is in the desert, or he is in the inner chamber." When Jesus returned invisibly to heaven, where do JWs say he returned? Come now, think of the Revelation book... that's right in the inner chamber.
Really then other Christian religions don't try to use bible chronology and prophesies because Jesus said those who would you shouldn't follow.
Tuesday while to question and test is healthy. Should we question to the point where nothing can appear accurate and we doubt everything?
As opposed to what? Accepting everything on face value. Or do we say "OK all this seems to be somewhat correct, maybe I should just accept all the rest, I mean who needs actual truth?" Or "All these things seem wrong, but there are two or three things right therefore they must be right".
I'm sorry though, do you think God thinks certain religions having a few of his teachings wrong is OK but other religions having teachings wrong is not OK? Why would God show that sort of favoritism?
"Jehovah's Witnesses, you predicted the end of the world in 1925, that's cool. Worldwide Church of God you predicted the end of the world in 1972, sorry you guys are false prophets and condemned. Jehovah's Witnesses you have the symbol of the false God Artemis at the front of your church, that's fine you're all good. Catholic Church you have the symbol of the false God Tamuz in the front of your church, sorry you're condemned."
Do you get my point? If you want truth then you will seek it, why forgive one religion for having mistakes in it so that you don't "over-think" things but not forgive other religions?
