Are Jehovah's witnesses real Christians?

[marks]

No. @Aunty Jane explained it is a speculative belief with biblical support but does not rise to the level of doctrine for JW. I am not JW.

I was not debating with AJ, I was debating with Michael. Apparently not all have the same views, hardly surprising I think.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Which God do you say Jesus worships sir? Either what I say is true or false, so state your Scriptural proof if I am incorrect, not just your opinion Marks.

Have you not read my posts?

Much love!

 

[marks]

Robert did respond in posts 829-835.

Not to what I've been saying about his mis-use of Revelation 5 for his word association game. Only to say I've not posted Scripture to back up what I've said which is patently false.

Given the nature of this non-debate, I'm putting the JW's back on ignore. This is not honest discussion, unfortunately.

But this did turn out to be a useful exercise to remember what JW's believe. And to answer once again the OP question.

Much love!

 

[Wrangler]

Do you believe Michael became Jesus?

Marks, are you OK? I literally just answered this question in my last post, # 838.

No.

No, I do not believe Michael became Jesus. There are several life forms revealed in Scripture, god, angel, man. Although similar in some ways (made in our image), different in other ways, god and angels are spirit but man (including Jesus) is flesh. It was not the blood of the spirit but the blood of the flesh that paid for our sins.

I am concerned about you marks. Like this exchage, Robert made numerous posts. Yet, you said he did not respond. Sometimes threads become so active, it is easy to miss posts made with good points and questions. One of the things I love about you is that you take care to end your post with "much love." And it has not escaped my notice that you do not end with a period but "!" to emphasize your passion.

I hope all is well and we may love well our Christian siblings, JW though they may be.

To be honest, Robert made a bigger deal about Jesus being a 'spirit being' than he did about being Michael. Both seem peculiar doctrines to me but I have to remind myself of what I frequently say, there is no doctrinal purity test to be saved.

Make a Blessed Day!

 

[Wrangler]

Not to what I've been saying about his mis-use of Revelation 5 for his word association game.

Correct me if I am wrong but I thought he referenced Rev 1:5, not Rev 5?

Given the nature of this non-debate, I'm putting the JW's back on ignore.

That's unfortunate. I find their posts very well researched, well thought out and respectfully delivered. This is true even when I do not agree with them.

Perhaps his lack of response is my fault. I kind of picked up the gauntlet to the points he made. Please forgive me and @Robert Gwin. Please consider NOT putting them on ignore.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Repent and turn around= STOP doing the sin. Thats believe on the real Jesus, not the fake one taught by trinities, nor Muslims nor Jewish. The real Jesus has a God like us, his Father-John 20:17, Rev 3:12--Coll 1:3, 1Cor 15:24-28, Eph 1:13,17--1Peter 1:3--see even his real appointed teachers teach that fact. Then and now.

So you believe one has to be sinlessly perfect then! Other wise they have not truly repented if they sin again.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

...................................
Your reply is supposed to be to my request (#759) for you to identify "which of the following are 'dynamic translations' and which are not"; apparently you are incapable.

As for your statement above ("Jesus [sic] name is above every single other name without exception") that would mean that his name is above the Father's name. Clearly the intended meaning is "The name which is above every other name [excluding his own and his Father's -- Holy Spirit has no personal name for obvious reasons]."

Well if one is to follow grammar, construct, syntax and all those other nasty little buggers that destroy cult philosophy- NO! Jesus name is even above the name Yahweh! (Which by the way is Jesus name as well). If you believe God knows grammar (as He created it) you can draw no other conclsuion.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

...................................
Just look in Strong's or The New American Standard concordances under "other." Allos is identified as #243, and heteros is identified as #2087. Allos is shown to be in dozens of places in the NT Greek text, starting with Matt 4:21. And heteros is found in dozens of places, starting with Matt. 6:24.

Your "research" and "knowledge" of NT Greek is, as usual, ridiculously wrong!

Well let me remind you! teh topic is does other appear in Phil 2 in any Greek manuscript! I was sticking to that. If you forgot that this was the subject- I can't help that. My research and knowledge of Greek supersedes yours and the supposed scholars in the Watchtower who wished to remain anonymous when they came out with teh New Word MIstranslation.

If I had written that monstrosity, I would wish to remain anonyumous as well.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Correct. Every resurrection prior to the resurrection of Jesus was physical. You are ignoring 1 Corinthians 15. Jesus was the first fruits of a resurrection to a spirit body.

Wrong. He was the firstfruits to be raised again from teh dead to a glorified body incapable of death! All other prior resurrections, the people died and are still dead. when Jeus rose He is to die no more! That is what all believers will experience.

Also:

Psalm 16:10
For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Acts 2:23-27
King James Version

23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:

26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:

27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.


John 2:18-22
King James Version

18 Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?

19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?

21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.


Jesus said- destroy my body and in three days I will raise my body from teh grave!

I am sorry. but people who believe the bible is God's Word know that Jesus physically rose from the dead!

 

[marks]

Marks, are you OK? I literally just answered this question in my last post, # 838.

I hadn't seen that one yet when I wrote my post . . . thank you for asking!

Robert made numerous posts. Yet, you said he did not respond. Sometimes threads become so active, it is easy to miss posts made with good points and questions.

Yeah, there is a lot of activity, and sometimes I don't see people's posts right away. But I give review, and I read more carefully than a lot of people read, or write, and while Robert did post some things, he never responded to the thing we've been going on about, his mis-use of Revelation 1:5, and that in fact it refutes that Jesus is anyone other then Himself, Jesus Christ, Son of God, and the Michael, a created angel. Unless I've missed something . . .

I hope all is well and we may love well our Christian siblings, JW though they may be.

I hope all is well with you also! We live at peace with, and in love relationships with others, to the best of our ability. Though as we've been determining on this thread, I cannot consider the "Jehovah's Witnesses" to be true Christianity, for the reasons previously explained. I don't judge any individual, as I've said, I'm speaking toward the teachings of the institution as explained to me by these individuals.

This isn't a complex thing to me. It's just a matter of accepting the sayings of Scripture, and rejecting what is contrary.

To be honest, Robert made a bigger deal about Jesus being a 'spirit being' than he did about being Michael. Both seem peculiar doctrines to me but I have to remind myself of what I frequently say, there is no doctrinal purity test to be saved.

He claimed both as true.

2 Corinthians 11:3-4 KJV
3) But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
4) For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

There can be those who preach another Jesus. In this case, a Jesus who is the created angel Michael, a Jesus who lies to his disciples about his resurrection, a Jesus who is declared antichrist by John. Another Jesus, who ceases to be Jesus, and returns to being Michael, the angel, though the Bible shows Him still to be Jesus Christ, or, if the JW version were true, who continues to lie about who he is.

I think this is a matter of preaching another Jesus, whom Paul did not preach. We're talking completely different "beings" here. An angel who takes on a different identity for the purpose of a body to be killed, then goes back to being an angel, all the while engaging in deception after deception. And making the Bible itself guilty of the same deceptions, as it promotes the version that the JW's say is the deception.

Do you need to need for me to go back into the details on any of these points? The simple statements made by these JW's? The simply refutations in Scripture, which they consider deceptions? Jesus temporarily receiving back his crucified body even after it was destroyed for the purpose of convincing Thomas that he was raised from the dead by giving Thomas a fake body to feel so he's believe? Isn't this what Robert has been saying?

The angels pointed to the empty space in the tomb as mute evidence that Jesus was risen. His body was gone, because He had risen from the dead.

Matthew 28:5-7 KJV
5) And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
6) He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
7) And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.

They must have been deceivers also then?

John 20:27-29 KJV
27) Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28) And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
29) Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Jesus, the deceiver?

Luke 24:37-40 KJV
37) But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.
38) And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
39) Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
40) And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.

??????

Luke 24:41-43 KJV
41) And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?
42) And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.
43) And he took it, and did eat before them.

How far do you think Jesus would go to push the Big Lie? Physical resurrection?

This is the Jesus I preach, the Son of God, the Lord from heaven, YHWH, Who took on flesh, and gave that flesh in death on the cross. For me. Then rose again from the dead, alive again, meaning, physical resurrection. And it is upon this truth, that Jesus died, was buried, then came back out of the tomb - the grave - in His now resurrected body, to ascend again to heaven, from which He will come, that I have the hope of salvation, and eternal life.

1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV
1) Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2) By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3) For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4) And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Psalms 16:10 KJV
10) For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Acts 2:24-32 KJV
24) Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.
25) For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:
26) Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:
27) Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
28) Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.
29) Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
30) Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
31) He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
32) This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

David? Still buried there in his tomb. Jesus? Risen from the dead, the tomb was empty.

John's declaration, denying Jesus came in flesh (perfect tense, still in flesh) is antichrist.

And given such a strong representation of Jesus' bodily resurrection (I've just shown a small part) their only answer is to claim it is all lies.

So are these "doctinal differences"? Or a "different Jesus", whom Paul did not preach?

Much love!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Many words are added in Scripture Ron, to assist in understanding. Have you ever looked at a word for word translation, very difficult to understand.

No they are not hard to understand. You are talking about a transliteral translation which does not correct from Greek to English world placement. But a literal word for word translation is fairly easy to understand, if we construct teh sentence in English correctly from the Greek. I will not go into teh lengthy grammatic instruction as to why a Greek to English cxorrect translation moves words around in English!

but a perfect example is JOhn 1:1---En arche ēn ho Logos, kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon, kai Theos ēn o Logos.

If we transliterate that- paart B would be "and God was the Word". but that would be an incorrect construct in English based on the construct of the greek

And when the words are added by bona fide translators- it is because the construct of the Greek shows it to be needed grammatically in english to render a correct grammatic sentence in English!

The Watchtower added "other" in Philippians 2 not because Grammar requires it, but because their false teaching on Jesus needs it!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I fully agree sir, honor, but not worship, understanding of degrees really comes into play so as not to commit idolatry, do you honestly think that we should honor our elders twice as much as Jehovah or Jesus Ron? Honor does not come from the word Proskuneo, translated worship as you stated, but one really needs to define it honestly, when it boils down to it, doesn't it really mean deep respect Ron?

Well you can keep straining at you rgnats to swallow you rcamels all the way to the lake of fire if you wish, butyou are simply lying to yourself!

Jesus did not give degrees in that statement.

"Timao" means reverence" So the same way you reverence the father you reverence the son. The Watchtower te4aches'Well Jesus doesn't mean that literally". We give the Father Worship- we give Jesus just obeisance"

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Jesus is never called God in the Bible sir. Might you post where I accused God of making an error of any kind, I would be interested in seeing that. I know that you are not ignorant of what you are posting sir, so why eat crow if you don't have to. It seems you are unable to reason on Scripture, why do you suppose that is?

Jesus is called God many times. I already posted them to you several times in other threads. If you cannot remember- that is your problem, not mine!

By saying Jesus is not god you make god a liar.

By denying Jesus physically rose from teh dead you make God a liar.

And by declaring numerous Watchtower doctrines as coming from god- you make god a liar!

 

[Keiw]

Your "scriptural answers" were just JW interpretations not shared by the majority of Christians..:)
For example I don't think there are any scriptures telling people to die rather than have transfusions.

The NT says--Abstain from blood--You nor a single teacher of yours can prove it doesnt mean transfusions. But the facts are clear--God doesnt want one putting anothers blood into their body, not eating it or in any way. Not even animal blood.

 

[Keiw]

.
Continued From No.817


Beware; not all that glitters is gold.

• 1Cor 11:14-15 . . Satan himself keeps transforming himself into an angel
of light. It is therefore nothing great if his ministers also keep transforming
themselves into ministers of righteousness.

Without the anointing spoken of by 1John 2:26-27, you are susceptible to
seduction by false appointed teachers, plus: you are not in union with God's
son: in point of fact, according to Rom 8:8-9, you are in harmony with the
flesh because God's spirit does not dwell in you, viz: those in harmony with
the flesh cannot please God.
_

I agree with your reasonings. That is why i carefully looked at both sides, studied true God worship history and all of Jesus teachings. I know 100% the teachings of Jesus and true God worship history backs my teachers all the way. There is no other backing better than those 2.

 

[Keiw]

So you believe one has to be sinlessly perfect then! Other wise they have not truly repented if they sin again.

All sin, some practice sin. But there are 2 lists of unacceptable sins at 1 Cor 6:9-11, Gal 5:19-21--Both spots teach--will not enter Gods kingdom if they practice one of those sins. Paul mentioned spiritism at Gal- the Greek word=Pharmacia=drug addiction is apart of that meaning. So along with all the false god worship and those 2 lists=99% mislead into not entering Gods kingdom. Jesus compared these last days to Noahs day(99.9% mislead)Luke 17:26--The reason Jesus knew--FEW will find the road that leads off into life.

 

[marks]

The NT says--Abstain from blood--You nor a single teacher of yours can prove it doesnt mean transfusions. But the facts are clear--God doesnt want one putting anothers blood into their body, not eating it or in any way. Not even animal blood.

You cannot prove that God forbids transfusions, and the commandment against eating blood is exactly that, a commandment against eating blood. That's all they did, they didn't do transfusions.

How do you know that God doesn't want one man to offer that small sacrifice to save the life of another man?

And besides, we have various examples in the Bible where human life is held above certain laws because God does in fact give precedence to human life. Even animals, rescuing your animals on the Sabbath, does God care for the animals, or is this written for us?

How rigid should you be in your observance of a law that's not written as you stand and watch some die who could be treated?

Much love!

 

[Dropship]

..If for some reason you do know of the faith that has absolute truth, please let me know sir, I will head that way quickly.

Well how about becoming non-denominational like me?;;)
Me and other non-denoms follow Jesus on a personal level because he said-
"You have one teacher, me" (Matthew 23:10)
I mean, he's simple enough to understand-
"And the common people heard him gladly" (Mark 12:37)
So it beats me why people think they have to join organised religions and cults to let them do their thinking for them..;)

 

[Dropship]

The NT says--Abstain from blood--You nor a single teacher of yours can prove it doesnt mean transfusions. But the facts are clear--God doesnt want one putting anothers blood into their body, not eating it or in any way. Not even animal blood.

God designed our bodies, so when my tummy tells me it fancies a nice juicy steak I give it what it wants..:)
“Then he sent some more servants and said, ‘Tell those who have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet" (Matthew 22:1-4)

 

[Aunty Jane]

Nobody likes having other people's blood pumped into them, but if it's necessary to save our life we have no choice..:)

Well, that is just your ignorance talking....as the video I linked to states, there is no reason to ever give blood even in trauma units. Our brotherhood in refusing blood, will accept alternative therapies. Most people are not aware that there are safer alternatives to blood transfusions....we know about all of them because we do careful research and we have a Hospital Liason Comittee who are available in all nations to provide up to date medical information for the treatment of Jehovah’s Witnesses under all circumstances. The fact is, more people die after receiving blood than ever die for refusing them.

Accepting a blood transfusion is no guarantee that a person will recover. The reason why there are now whole hospitals dedicated to non-blood management of their patients is testimony to the fact that they are not the life-saving procedure they were once thought to be, so doctors who resort to them these days are not up to date on the safest medical procedures. If a doctor wants to use blood we will find one who won’t, and rapid recovery is confirmation that we made the right choice.

Those who die for supposedly refusing a blood transfusion, would in all probability have died anyway because the bleeding could not be stopped. It’s a fact, people die and nothing can save them.

What you post is biased and not in accord with our experience or the latest medical information.
The video I gave you made clear statements about the dangers associated with blood transfusions, saying that there is more “morbidity” (bad outcomes) and “mortality” (death) associated with this procedure that any other medical intervention. It also stated that most of the transfusions given were unnecessary and therefore putting patients at risk for no good reason.

We do not force our beliefs on others, but we will sound the warning that blood is a business that makes a lot of money for the that aspect of medicine....they are not keen on telling the truth because money speaks louder than truth in this world.

Everyone is free to make their own decisions about this.