Posts by mizpah

3

For the person who asked about Born Again Christians before.

by neverthere in

i have a friend who is born again and she gave me a pamphlet about it when i mentioned the thread on this site about it.

if you were to ask your friends hot to get to heaven, you would probably receive as many answers as the number of friends you have.

someone would probably suggest that you should keep the golden rule; someone else might say that you need to live up to the ten commandments; others might advise that you should pray, or give to the chursh and the poor, or that you should "just do the best you can.".

mizpah

Sometimes Christians focus in on one doctrine to make it their "hallmark." I've found this to be true with many "born-again Christians." What many are saying is that unless one has the same spiritual experience as did they, they have not become "born again" as a Christian. It is similar in other denominations. Some Pentecostalists put the emphasis on "talking in tongues." They feel this is God's signature upon them that they are really "children of God." Other groups emphasize "healings" or some other "gift of the holy spirit."

However, if a Christian uses this as a litmus test for other Christians, he slips over to a dangerous area of judging others. Once done, he is not acting as a Christian...but as God.

5

Another Canadian Blood Lawsuit

by Kenneson in

jw's are at it again.

today's calgary sun carries the story, "blood battle lawsuit filed.

parents fought blood transfusion.

mizpah

We should have compassion and pity for the parents who agonize over the life of a child and their faith. For anyone who has ever faced this decision, one knows that it is not a clear cut one at all. I feel sorry for all JW parents who have to face this situation.

Our anger should be directed toward the Watchtower organization who still promotes its unscriptural and cruel policy regarding blood transfusions. Like Baal of old, it doesn't mind sacrificing children for its own purpose.

8

Rule by committee

by Euphemism in

proplog recently started a thread about the scriptural basis for having a committee lead a congregation, rather than one man.

putting that question aside for a moment, however, i just wanted to talk about the practical realities of organization.. for many, the change from congregation servants to the elder arrangement was welcome.

it avoided the situation of local 'petty dictators' having absolute control over a congregation.. on the other hand, it also had its downsides.

mizpah

It was my experience in the organization that it mattered little if one or more were appointed for oversight. When the elder arrangement was initiated, most "congregation servants" made sure their own men got in. These, being grateful for the appointment, allowed him to take the leadership and often recommended him as the "presiding overseer."

It is only by attrition that changes are made. These presiding overseers get old and die. But usually the same spirit remains. The elders like the status quo of their positions. And usually they will recommend a presiding overseer that will keep it that way. That is why there has been little that has changed in the congregations in spite of the "elder arrangement."

133

Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 1

by hooberus in

in this series i hope to discuss some common verses used by the watchtower to "disprove" the trinity and deity of the lord jesus christ.

the first one is 1 corinthians 8:6: .

"but to us there is but one god, the father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one lord jesus christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

mizpah

Hooberus:

The context of 1 Co. 8 has to be considered. Paul is contrasting the "many gods and many lords" with the true "God" and true "Lord" of the Christians. He, in fact, recognizes the existence of gods and lords in heaven and earth. (Vs. 5) The terms are not exclusive and are used in the Bible to describe angels and men.

I don't think most unitarians disagree with the fact that both deity and lordship was conferred upon Christ by his Father. Therefore, Thomas's words are appropriate. The point of disagreement would be the convoluted arguments that try to rationalize the simple words of Paul "one God, the Father" and "one Lord, Jesus Christ" to make it sound as if the trinity doctrine was being promulgated. Wouldn't it be much easier to just accept Paul's words at face value?

61

Does any one remember when the cong's were segregated in the South?

by Victorian sky in

last night i watched the abc special on the 40th anniversary of king's "i have a dream" speech.

a memory came back to me of the last district convention i attented.

it was in west palm beach (anyone ever been to the leake teepe?

mizpah

Many southern states had strict segregation laws before the civil rights laws were passed. The Watchtower Society used this fact as reasons for segregating the congregations and assemblies. "We have to obey Ceasar's Laws." But afterwards, the congregations were slowly integrated when the civil rights laws were established nationally.

I don't think the majority of Jehovah's Witnesses were prejudiced. But there were a few in the organization thought blacks were inferior and not to be trusted with positions of responsibility. In the twenty five years of association, I only knew of one black circuit overseer in our area. And this was in the mid 70s.

35

What does the Trinity doctrine teach?

by hooberus in

the athanasian creed

we worship one god [note: the trinity is monotheistic teaching only one god] in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the persons[note: the trinity does not teach that the father and the son are the same person or that jesus prayed to himself] nor dividing the substance [note:though they are different persons they are the same god.].

for the person of the father is one; of the son, another; of the holy spirit, another.

mizpah

Yerusalyim:

...."imperfect communion with the Catholic church"?......"attain the fulness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist?" It certainly doesn't sound like full acceptance to me. It sounds conditional upon recognizing the Catholic church as the "one true church." It still seems to mask the real issue of whether or not non-Catholics who reject the church will be saved.

Many of the Protestant churches come from the tradition of the great Reformers who condemned the Catholic church as the "antichrist" and the "whore of Babylon." While they have tempered the tone of their message in modern times, they still hold to the general theme that the Catholic church is not the one true church and that the Protestant reformation restored primitive Christianity. Orthodox churches have never recognized the primacy of the Pope. As long as the Pope claims this, I don't see them in union with the church. As long as these views hold, do you think they will still be saved? Is salvation contigent upon recognizing the Catholic church as the "one true church"?

What is the source of your information. And doesn't this view alter the viewpoint that was held by the Catholic church for centuries?

35

What does the Trinity doctrine teach?

by hooberus in

the athanasian creed

we worship one god [note: the trinity is monotheistic teaching only one god] in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the persons[note: the trinity does not teach that the father and the son are the same person or that jesus prayed to himself] nor dividing the substance [note:though they are different persons they are the same god.].

for the person of the father is one; of the son, another; of the holy spirit, another.

mizpah

Yerusalyim:

Where does this put all those Protestants who do know the gospel but still reject the Catholic church?

36

Transcript: Beware of the Voice of Strangers

by Scully in

many thanks go to the following who made this possible:.

nosferatu for originally acquiring the recording and uploading it for everyone to hear.. hamas for hosting it so that even more people could listen to it;.

and finally to euphemism and odrade for their help in transcribing the entire talk with me.. without further ado, here is the transcript for the talk beware of the voice of strangers:.

mizpah

The Society only reacts like this when something is having a profound affect upon its membership. So, the very fact that it has devoted time to the subject indicates a serious problem. For someJWs, this will only peak their curiosity to investigate sites such as this one.

The Society's influence is only relative. Obviously, it can not stop the ones who seek information in the privacy of their homes. The computer continues to be a great instrument for those who will not be confined to an authortarian regime such as the Watchtower Society.

35

What does the Trinity doctrine teach?

by hooberus in

the athanasian creed

we worship one god [note: the trinity is monotheistic teaching only one god] in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the persons[note: the trinity does not teach that the father and the son are the same person or that jesus prayed to himself] nor dividing the substance [note:though they are different persons they are the same god.].

for the person of the father is one; of the son, another; of the holy spirit, another.

mizpah

Only orthodoxy thinks that the Arian creed was apostate. But many churchmen of the time vascillated between the teachings of Athanasius and Arian...as did Constantine and his sons. Some even tried to compromise the two beliefs. It seems that the teachings were still "in flux" during the 4th century. To be sure, orthodoxy won out. But the unitarian belief, although in the minority, is still alive and well among Christians today.

I think the teaching of the Catholic church about others not of Catholic faith gaining salvation outside the church is mainly for public consumption. Just recently I talked with a Catholic nun who was quite candid in saying there is no salvation outside the church. She said one must partake of the sacraments of the church to gain God's approval. And I get the feeling that this is probably reflective of the official view.

35

What does the Trinity doctrine teach?

by hooberus in

the athanasian creed

we worship one god [note: the trinity is monotheistic teaching only one god] in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the persons[note: the trinity does not teach that the father and the son are the same person or that jesus prayed to himself] nor dividing the substance [note:though they are different persons they are the same god.].

for the person of the father is one; of the son, another; of the holy spirit, another.

mizpah

I don't think that even trinitarians would equate God with Family. Otherwise, many unitarians would accept the concept, at least, with the relationship of the Father and Son. It took centuries to define the trinity doctrine. In contrast, the Bible simply reveals a relationship of a Father to a Son. This is no "mystery." Every human can understand that relationship. So, why go "beyond what is written?"