Posts by mizpah

37

micheal the archangel

by trinity4life in

.

i have not found one jehovahs witness who could show me in the bible where jesus is refered to as micheal the archangel or that you could draw such a conclusion.

if anyone is willing to discuss this topic with me i would greatly appriciate it.

The scholarly position would have been to draw attention to the role that Michael the archangel plays in Scripture without being dogmatic about who he is. I think some of the reasoning is probably valid. The role that Michael plays lends itself to the same role that Christ plays. The mistake is to make it dogma within the belief system of Jehovah's Witnesses.

The same would hold true for other teachings of the Watchtower Society including that on blood. It should have presented its material based upon Scriptures and even its opinion about them. But the decision should have been left entirely to the consciences of its members.

There are many things in the Bible that do not have conclusive answers. That is why there are so many denominations. But Christians don't have to conform to the same doctrines to be unified in their central belief in Jesus Christ.

19

Do you believe Christ returned invisibly ? Did Russell make everything up ?

by run dont walk in

in january, 1876, when he was 23 years old, russell received a copy of the herald of the morning, an adventist magazine published by nelson h. barbour of rochester, new york.

one of the distinguishing features of barbour's group at that time was their belief that christ returned invisibly in 1874, and this concept presented in the herald captured russell's attention.

it meant that this adventist splinter group had not remained defeated, as others had, when christ failed to appear in 1874 as adventist leaders had predicted; somehow this small group had managed to hold onto the date by affirming that the lord had indeed returned at the appointed time, only invisibly.

mizpah

Greven is right. Russell never changed his teaching that Christ returned in 1874. And I believe that some of his followers teach the same doctrine to this very day. Rutherford continued to teach this after Russell's death. But when his predictions failed (especially about the "ancient worthies") he decided to revise the whole dating system of Russell. He advanced the "parousia" of Christ to 1914. He did the same with the first resurrection and Christ's coming to his temple. He changed 1878 to 1918. 1914 became the "beginning of the end" instead of the end itself as Russell had predicted. This gave Rutherford much more time to explain away the failures of Russell. Many JWs felt that the "end" would come in 1954 or 1958 because they thought a 40 year period was significant. But it was never the official view of the Watchtower Society.

It is difficult to read the history of the Watchtower Society and not conclude it was a comedy of errors from the start. But there are still many who would defend the Watchtower's position either in Russell's day or in Rutherford's day. The only religious leader out of the whole Adventist movement that apologized to his followers for his mistake was William Miller... And he started it all....at least, in the U.S.

37

micheal the archangel

by trinity4life in

.

i have not found one jehovahs witness who could show me in the bible where jesus is refered to as micheal the archangel or that you could draw such a conclusion.

if anyone is willing to discuss this topic with me i would greatly appriciate it.

mizpah

The only "evidence" that Jehovah's Witnesses can cite is the scripture (1 Thessalonions 4:16) that Christ comes "...with the voice of an archangel..." The rest of the evidence is only circumstantial. But the Watchtower Society draws absolute conclusions.

In Daniel (chapters 10 7 12} Michael is identified as "the great prince" who stands up for Jehovah's people.

In Revelation, (chapter 12} "Michael and his angels" are the ones who cast Satan and his angels out of heaven. (The Watchtower draws a parallel with the prophecy of Genesis 3:15 which speaks of the woman's seed that crushes the serpent's head.)

But the fact is that the Scriptures do not make a positive identity of Michael, the archangel. Therefore, it is poor Biblical research to be dogmatic about it. But, then, the Watchtower never allows facts to get in the way of their dogma.

12

What are you doing to preach the "good news" to your neighbors?

by mizpah in

when i left the organization this question was asked by some jws.

it was undoubtedly asked with the thought in mind that we weren't fulfilling our dedication to jehovah?

i know what my answer was to this.

mizpah

The "gospel" or good news of the 1st century was quite different from the message that JWs preach today. The good news was basically that Christ had come and given his life on behalf of mankind. And that he was resurrected and would come again to restore life. Believers shared this faith with their families and neighbors. But there were only some in the congregation who were appointed to be "evangelizers." Equally important as preaching were the other "gifts" that were manifested including showing kindness and hospitality. The churches of that time were not established for the sole purpose of sending out each individual member as a preacher. But they were centers of shared faith and warm association. And to be noted, these churches were in homes of people...not in Kingdom Halls.

What Jehovah's Witnesses fail to recognize is that if their message that Christ came invisibly in 1914 and has been reigning in the heavens since that time is wrong, then they have been preaching a false message these many years. This would make them the "false prophets" and "false teachers" of Jesus' warning. And this should be a sobering thought for all who are JWs.

12

What are you doing to preach the "good news" to your neighbors?

by mizpah in

when i left the organization this question was asked by some jws.

it was undoubtedly asked with the thought in mind that we weren't fulfilling our dedication to jehovah?

i know what my answer was to this.

mizpah

When I left the organization this question was asked by some JWs. It was undoubtedly asked with the thought in mind that we weren't fulfilling our dedication to Jehovah? I know what my answer was to this. But I would be interested to read what others have to say about it.

20

Is The WTS A Masonic Organization?

by Latin assassin from Manhattan in

is it possible that the wts comes out with 'new light' in order to hide a secret truth within the higher ranks of its organization?

mizpah

willy-think:

Where did you hear or read this? Can you confirm this to be true? Often rumors make claims that prove to be untrue.

I know pictures of Russell's gravesite was on another site...but I can't recall which one. It probably would give you the cemetery name. But I don't recall anything being said that it was a graveyard exclusively for Masons.

15

I have a question about the assemblies.

by twolips in

.

when i was young (er) the society said the army came to the assemblies to observe how they fed the flock.. my question is, even though the asemblies were much more grander then now, with the food distribution ending and all, feeding thousands of people.

now they bring their own lunches.......i regress...does anyone remember how the military was in awe of us?.

mizpah

Flowerpetal:

There were many rumors over the years about celebreties or their wives who became Jehovah's Witnesses. The only time that I remember seeing one was at an assembly in Boston. Mickey Spillaine (Sp.?) was working there. Everyone was excited to see him. I heard in later years that he left the Watchtower organization and started writing his "racy" books again.

I remember hearing that Louis Armstrong's wife was a JW, too. But it was never confirmed. There seemed to be a compulsion in those days to have someone of notoriety in the organization. However, I think the feelings have changed somewhat since Michael Jackson and Prince. Now, JWs seem to cringe at the mention of these names.

20

Is The WTS A Masonic Organization?

by Latin assassin from Manhattan in

is it possible that the wts comes out with 'new light' in order to hide a secret truth within the higher ranks of its organization?

mizpah

Thetruthaboutjws: If my memory serves me right, there was a group in Germany in the 18th century that called themselves the "Illuminati." Also, there was a religous group in Spain in the 16th century that called themselves by the same. The name came to be loosely associated with freethinkers and radicals including the Freemasons. There probably are still groups that identify themselves by "Illuminati" today. I'm sure there is more information on them available on line.

14

Christian Congregation/First Century governing body?

by zev in

what were they called back then in the bible?.

did they call themselves the "first century governing body"?.

or "christian congregation"?.

mizpah

lawrence:

The Watchtower Society likes to link itself with these historical groups to give its own organization a historical legitimacy. Cathars, Waldenses, Wyclifites, etc. all had some things in common. They lived simple lives, they used the Bible in their worship and they were persecuted by the Catholic leaders. They also rejected the authority and rituals of the church. ( Most Protestant churches probably feel that these early groups were instrumental and essential to their own movement in later times.)

However the Waldneses and others did not reject doctrines like the Trinity, Soul or Hell. So if they existed today, the Watchtower would identify them as part of "Babylon the Great." But the distance of history makes them very convenient for the Watchtower "to rub shoulders" with these groups.

11

Jehovah Had No Beginning!!

by Black Man in

does that make sense to you?

it doesn't to me.

mizpah

Faith: "...the assured expectations of things hoped for, the reality of things not beheld...."

Hope: "...that God exists and He becomes the rewarder of those doing good...."

Love: "...it always trusts, alway hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails...."