he has murdered hundreds of innocent people you dont know he is pure evil
- Thread starter Holy999
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Berean
Well-Known Member
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
None that I personally know of….and many were threatened with death if they didn’t accept blood, but saline administered to prevent the veins collapsing and the administration of EPO had red cells replenishing in no time….much to the surprise of the medical staff, who believed what they had been taught.
I heard a story some years ago about a young sister in Queensland who was brought into hospital with swelling in her leg…..they assumed it was a clot and gave her blood thinners, but then discoverd that she had a tear in a major vein or artery and was bleeding into the tissue, but the blood thinner had been administered and there was apparently nothing that could be done to reverse it, so she bled out….not for refusing a blood transfusion, but for medical negligence. We all wondered if there was a way to reverse their mistake but they let her die. She spent her last hours in a room full of her friends and family comforted by the hope of the resurrection…because you see, there is nothing that can separate us from God….not even death. (Romans 8:31-35) We value life, but not over obedience to God.
I am not a fan of Transplants.
I once was, but a good mate had kidney transplant. They go nuts ! it was Nasty. all of the pills etc and he was one of the real good ones who it took real well. but he never did seek mental help, they sure need it, because they can realy loose the plot ! Sad to see such take place.
Look at all of the people who got AIDS from blood transfusions ? How retarded were the system before they worked that out !
Not to mention the things we can do nowadays has improved so much.
But then again the system is controled by much evil within, as we seen all in regards with all involved with COVID, truly Hitler could be at the wheel as far as most people know, it's all so hidden to what truly goes on in depth. Like AIDS was set up to become big buisness, to much money is involved to of just got rid of AIDS ! and they could easy of stoped AIDS for good in fact, but for the money that all such brings in !
Such has the power to make the majority to be so ignorant as a bum. for the slobs do not question anything much at all !
It's just like mechanics can peddle any stupid idiot story to most people and they do ! it's big money to do so, just lie ! One even tryed it on me, he claimed a bush was floged out, I said come and look at the speedo, a brand new car with 243 KM up ! what a flogger ! he said to me their are 3 of us here and only one of you ! If I was not a Christian I would of hit him directly.
But hey this type of lowlife are every where regardless !
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Sadly it is the world we are stuck with for now……but not much longer before the King comes as judge with his army, to sort the “sheep from the goats”……we who have not swallowed the lies of satan’s world will have a lot to look forward to…I am grateful to live where I do….we Aussies don’t have the problems that so many other countries do….for now anyway. If you steer away from bad politics, rampant materialism with the greedy commercial system throwing ads at you every 2 seconds, and the false religious system pretending to be something it isn’t…..you are in a much better frame of mind to accept what is to the masses, a very inconvenient truth. There can only be one truth.
AngelicArcher
Active Member
AngelicArcher
Active Member
They're OK with that though. Just as they're OK with dying due to refusal of a blood transfusion.
It's their choice.
How many children,babies,of Christian Scientists have died when antibiotics could have saved their life?
Cults cost.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
It’s everyone’s choice as to what medical intervention they will allow….some cancer patients understand that chemotherapy kills people…it doesn’t save them. They end up dying from the treatment rather than the cancer…..A lot of people are now opting for alternative therapies…some that are banned under current medical practice, but have survived to tell the story.
In recent times cannabis has been proven to cure certain ailments and yet it has been banned as a dangerous addictive drug for decades….lies! It is neither, but they don’t let the truth get in the way of their massive profits.
Big pharma now is manufacturing and selling it at ridiculous prices…..how amazing that you can grow it yourself and make your own medicine for free in your kitchen….they made sure that most people can’t do this legally. Are you getting the picture?
God’s pharmacy has many medicinal herbs and plants, demonized by the medical establishment for decades now, only to find that pharma drugs, pushed by medical school trained doctors, are the number one killer in western medicine. Why would it be a shock to find that blood transfusions are also death dealing rather than life saving?
Who is ruling this world? (1 John 5:19)
JW’s are not anti-medicine, but pro scientifically proven treatments….those natural treatments from plants that God provided, don’t come with a long list of dangerous side effects…..they are usually safe and effective. Alternative practitioners are in growing demand.
The over use of antibiotics has now led to the adaptation of the bacteria found in so many hospitals these days, into becoming immune to the drugs that used to kill them…..now you can’t kill them with anything….people get sepsis and die….and there is not a thing modern medicine can do about it.
Welcome to satan’s world….
Berean
Well-Known Member
Is it really their choice? Or has the choice been made for them, and the only choice they have is to obey the governing body, because the moment they don't they are no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses and lose their families and livelihood.
I don't know, are there any Christian Scientist on this forum?
AngelicArcher
Active Member
If true,and I'm not saying it isn't I just don't know the shunning part of JW, it's like I said, cults cost.
When they're not following Jesus,it costs everything. If they want eternity with him,losing family and associates who remain in the JW temple, is better than losing their soul.
Good question.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
You never miss an opportunity do you….the self professed expert on all things JW….but you really haven’t got a clue.
The blood issue is scriptural like sexual immorality, it carried the death penalty….this is how God feels about the misuse of blood. It is not the governing body who made this law…it is God himself who reestablished it three times in three different eras…..not important to him you reckon?
You are free to accept all the blood you like…but for me personally I will obey my Creator and not make excuses for disobeying him, to purportedly save my life…..but actually blood does not “save” anyone really….did you watch the video?….people recover in spite of blood transfusions rather than because of them. More people die after a transfusion than who ever die for refusing one. It’s your choice of doctor that makes the difference…if they want to use blood then they aren’t much of a doctor, knowing what they do now about it’s effects on the body. It’s the lazy or uninformed doctor’s approach.
And as for the emotionally charged accusation about losing their families and livelihood, what a load of cods. Disfellowshipping is entirely scriptural and we are told in scripture not to associate with those who willfully and unrepentantly break God’s law.
1 Cor 5:9-13 says….
”In my letter I wrote you to stop keeping company with sexually immoral people, 10 not meaning entirely with the sexually immoral people of this world or the greedy people or extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world. 11 But now I am writing you to stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. 12 For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Do you not judge those inside, 13 while God judges those outside? “Remove the wicked person from among yourselves.”
What was the directive? And who was this directive speaking about?…”someone called a brother”…IOW a fellow Christian who was engaging in the conduct that Paul’s mentioned.
Who was Paul talking to? All in the congregation.
Who were to do the removing of the wicked one? Those appointed as elders, the congregation leaders, whom we are admonished to obey their direction. (Heb 13:17)
Removal from the congregation didn’t involve removal from the family, but that the family would not “fellowship” with that one, or treat them like their conduct didnt matter. Avoiding their company except when it was necessary, would send a very strong message.
Jesus established a precedent when he said to his fellow Jews who became his disciples….
Matt 10:34-36…
”Do not think I came to bring peace to the earth; I came to bring, not peace, but a sword. 35 For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 Indeed, a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.”
When a family member divides themselves from us through ungodly conduct, we do not sit quietly by and condone it. If they are a dedicated and baptized Christian, then if they are unrepentant, they will be expelled from the congregation, as well as losing fellowship with friends and family. The scripture in 1 Cor 5:9-13 tells us what to do. How else do you show someone that you do not approve of their conduct or speech? If you act like nothing is wrong, and do not try to readjust their thinking, you share in their wickedness. (2 John 9-11)
God says that the elders can judge inside the congregation whist he judges those outside.
Imagine if the churches did that….? How many would remain in the pews to put money in the basket to support the minister in a shrinking congregation? He’s not gonna say much, or turf the offender out…is he?
They are his meal ticket.
Last edited:
Berean
Well-Known Member
And you never miss an opportunity to skirt around the subject and never truly answer it. For someone whose been a Witness for over 50 years, you sure seem to be blind to their past.
And where exactly does God say "Thou shalt not have blood transfusions?" All I see are interpretations.
Berean
Well-Known Member
Where did I say disfellowshipping was unscriptural? All I have said is that the Society uses disfellowshipping as a crutch to keep the rank-and-file in line. In the example you gave, what was the sin? Was it not fornication? However, the Witnesses have gone beyond the sin of fornication when reproving their members.
Berean
Well-Known Member
I did a search and found this on the JW.org site. It’s lesson 12 of the WHAT DOES GOD REQUIRE OF US - Showing Respect for Life and Blood
“Is it wrong to accept a blood transfusion? Remember, Jehovah requires that we abstain from blood. This means that we must not take into our bodies in any way at all other people’s blood or even our own blood that has been stored. (Acts 21:25) So true Christians will not accept a blood transfusion. They will accept other kinds of medical treatment, such as transfusion of nonblood products. They want to live, but they will not try to save their life by breaking God’s laws.—Matthew 16:25.
Now, this is a fairly liberal interpretation of the Acts passage cited: “As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.”
The Apostle here is discussing the thought that Gentile converts were not under the demands of the Jewish Law. Because he was a Jew, the Apostle had the right to purify himself (as he obviously did in vs. 26) if he came into contact with blood or partook of meat that had been offered to idols. He did so not because he trusted in that service as a condition of his salvation, but as a concession to his Jewish brethren who had not as yet been enlightened on the subject. But for the Gentiles, they were under no such command. The argument starts in v. 19 and this 25th verse shows that “they observe no such thing” for they are not under the Law. For the Gentiles to attempt the practice of the Jewish Law ceremonies and rites would imply that they were trusting in those symbols for their salvation, and not relying wholly upon the merit of Christ’s sacrifice.
Now, as you know, being a JW, you commonly refer to Gen. 9: 4 where Noah is told, “But the flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.” Your NEW WORLD TRANSLATION reads, “… flesh with its soul— its blood—you must not eat.” It seems you’ve again taken great liberty to read into the text things that are just not there. The blood spoken of is that of lower animals, which of course would have nothing to do with transfusions. We can find agreement on the incentive not to drink or eat blood, or eat meat raw, but taking human blood, whether one’s own or another’s, for medical purposes is stretching the point of this Scripture.
In your publications the Society has used to “prove” this point Lev. 17: 10-14; 7: 26-27; Deut. 12: 15, 16, 23, 27; and 1 Samuel 14: 32-34—but in each case they clearly refer only to the blood of lower animals. They do “claim” however, that 1 Chron. 11: 17-19 is a proof that human blood is included. This is the occasion when three of David’s men risked their lives to get him a drink of water, and he could not drink it in light of the danger they had placed themselves in to obtain it, stating, “my God forbid it me that I should do this thing: shall I drink the blood of these men that have put their lives in jeopardy?” (v. 19). It’s evident that there is no connection between this passage and those listed above regarding drinking animal blood, and also that David here is speaking not of ingesting real human blood at all, but using a figure of speech. He appreciated the efforts of these faithful and loving men, and wouldn’t take advantage of them for his own advantage, and poured out the water as a drink offering to the Lord on their behalf, symbolically speaking, he refused to drink their blood.
One of the passages quoted above (Lev. 17: 10-14) states, “For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.” One of the main reasons for Jehovah’s prohibition against eating the blood of those lower animals is that it had been reserved for typical sacrifices to make typical atonement, for “without the shedding of blood is no remission” (Heb. 9: 22). Paul tells us that the “Law was a shadow of better things to come” (Heb. 10: 1). He goes on to state, “for it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins” (Heb. 10: 4). Then speaking of Jesus he continues “Lo, I come to do Your will O God, He takes away the first (the type) that He may establish the second (the antitype), by the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Heb. 10: 9, 10). So the Apostle’s point is clearly understood, that the blood, whether in the symbol of a type or in the actuality of what that type pointed to, was precious in the sight of God.
Since we have no Scriptures that directly treat of the matter, let’s look to the application of the principles laid down in God’s Word for some indication in answer to the question. We find that when God’s Word tells us (Lev. 17: 14) that “the life of all flesh is the blood thereof,” He indicates that the blood’s chief function is to impart life-principle to every part of the body and to keep it there, for the life-laden blood is the vehicle of the life-principle, which in vs. 11 and 14 as well as in Deut. 12:23 is called “the life”. If a person's life is fading and a compatible donor provides blood to help them, it’s reasonable to expect that this can slow down the dying process and extend their life. I’m well aware that the best that a blood transfusion can do for us is merely to prolong the life span of an otherwise dying human, lingering under the curse. It bears no similarity to Jesus’ sacrifice, for only His blood the merit of His human life laid down as a purchase price for Adam and his race, gives life everlasting (1 Cor. 15: 21, 22).
For a consecrated child of God to give some of his or her blood, on behalf of one in need is surely no sin; even as it is not a sin if one were to lose some blood in the process of defending another from attack. Consecrated Christians should remember that they have devoted their lives unto God; and while they are to do good to all men as they have opportunity, it is to be especially unto the household of faith (Gal. 6: 10). Furthermore, “we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren”—particularly in building up one another in the most holy faith (1 John 3: 16). “If any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel” (1 Tim. 5: 8). Therefore, if a member of one’s own family, or a near relative, or one of the brethren, or a close friend, is really in need of additional blood, to keep them alive, I see no Scriptural reason why a consecrated child of God may not donate some blood for that purpose. If an individual is not comfortable with the thought of giving their blood for the advantage of another, that’s understandable, but, it’s quite another thing for the Society’s directive that the Lord’s people must keep themselves clean from such a practice, claiming that this is the teaching of the Holy Scriptures, is a misleading statement.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
I believe I answered it quite fully and, perhaps you didn’t watch the video either….? Because if you did, you would not be arguing with me over a medical treatment that has ”more morbidity” (serious complications) and ”mortality“ (death as a result) “than any other medical intervention“.
Would God recommend such a procedure if it was truly life saving and health giving? Why was consuming blood so offensive to God in the first place?
I am fully aware of their past…..just not obsessed with it as you seem to be. We have moved on as the light on the path got brighter (Prov 4:18) Truth in the Scriptures was revealed progressively….that is what God does….”food at the proper time“. (Matt 24:45)
We have not been left behind in the dark clinging to a dead man who was not Jesus Christ, nor did he ever claim to be a prophet.
All I see are excuses to break God’s clearly stated law. To “abstain” means what it says. What does it mean if the doctor tells you to “abstain” from a certain product because it is bad for your health….would you then modify it and inject it straight into your veins?
Well since you apparently ignore any scripture that disagrees with your particular take on things, let’s see….
1 Cor 5:11…..
”But now I am writing you to stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.”
2 John 9-11 also mentions those who try to subvert the faith of others by introducing ideas that do not find a place in the teachings of Jesus Christ….
“Everyone who pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. The one who does remain in this teaching is the one who has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. 11 For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.”
There is a list…..so, any who want to conduct themselves in these ways, unrepentantly, will be shown the door.
No apologies for that.
Last edited:
Berean
Well-Known Member
It would seem that the "food at the proper time" came when he returned, not a constant changing of it. Tell me, when will the truth fully be restored?
No, you cling to a group of men who claim to be prophets, speaking for Christ
Seems the ones pushing ahead are your governing body, who are constantly making changes, like the Pharisee's they Lord it over the people. Jesus had a lot to say about them, all one has to do is substitute Pharisees, Sadducees and scribes with Governing Body and the scenario fits well.
You and your brethren will have no excuses when the day comes and you're asked, 'why did you follow these men?' Will you shift the blame as Adam did and say "the men whom you gave us, they fed us and we did eat." (Matthew 16:6; Col. 2:8)
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Do you doubt that the “faithful slave” was appointed in the last days? Matt 24:45 was part of the end times prophesy that Jesus gave to show us what would take place some 2000 years into the future. Did his disciples know that back then?
Since “food at the proper time” was to be given, that means it was “what” we needed to know “when” we needed to know it. The truth was never revealed all at once. Even as Jesus was ascending to heaven the apostles asked if he was restoring the kingdom to Israel there and then? (Acts 1:6) How did they not know what he had been teaching them for three and a half years as his constant companions?
They have never claimed to be prophets….Russell never did, and neither did those who succeeded him.
All they claim to be are shepherds. And we are told in Hebrews 13:17 to “obey those taking the lead among us and be submissive”, but is also says that they will account to God for the leadership they provide…..so as long as these shepherds do not teach us anything that is not from God’s word, we will follow their direction, according to our own knowledge of scripture….something that is studied every week at our meetings.
You keep bringing this up as if we are not to expect clarification as the time for judgment approaches. The light on the path was not to remain dim, (Prov 4:18) but it was to get brighter as Jehovah’s day approached….your light went out when Russell died. You are stuck in the past with very limited understanding about these last days and what Jesus instructed his disciples to do. (Matt 24:14, Matt 28:18-20) Where are you all in carrying out the great commission? Completely MIA like Christendom. It was to be carried out until “the end” which is now closer than its ever been. We are not judged by our words, but by our actions. “Doing the will of the Father”.
Perhaps we need to wait and see who it is that Jesus accepts as his own when the time for his arrival as judge comes unexpectedly upon the world. (Matt 7:21-23; Matt 24:44)
Since the “faithful slave” is appointed by Jesus himself in these “last days”….and these are the only ones guiding and directing the work that Jesus commanded to be done “in all the inhabited earth” before “the end” came….perhaps he will ask you why you didn’t listen to those men? Where do you think brother Russell is right now?
It is a wait and see…isn’t it? Actions speak louder than words. Do we really expect God’s true servants to be treated any differently to the Master? (John 15:18-21) Yet Jesus promised that people would listen and respond to their preaching, just as they responded to his, despite the difficulty that created for them. (Matt 10:34-39)
Are your group hated by the world for simply teaching the truth and doing what Christ commanded? Who has ever heard of you? In all my years of ministry, I have never met a single member of your church. Can you tell me why?
Berean
Well-Known Member
We just disagree on who that slave is. I believe it's an individual, you believe it's a class, a class that constantly changes and ironically, with each new member of this class, comes changes in beliefs.
Let me ask, what was the purpose of appointing that servant? In the parable, our Lord explains that the servants who are diligently waiting for their master to return from the wedding will receive special recognition. He will serve them by preparing a meal and attending to their needs. This parable refers to His Second Coming and the blessings for those who are faithfully anticipating His return. Our Lord clarifies how He will fulfill this promise by appointing a "wise and faithful servant" as His representative. This servant will provide the faithful, waiting individuals with their share of food at the proper time. The Lord assures us that if this servant remains loyal in his duties, he will be made ruler over all that belongs to the Lord, including the food supplied for His household during the harvest. While this servant will gather the food from the storehouse, his fellow servants will assist in distributing it.
I want to focus your attention to what your Society stated in their Centennial brochure in 1984, you can read it on their website.
"THE Watch Tower Society did not create the Bible Students, nor did it begin the work of disseminating Bible truths and preparing men for the return of Our Lord. The Society was formed to expand the work already begun by Charles Taze Russell and his associates." - page 4
We were here first.
Some (you) argue that Matthew 24:45-47 and Luke 12:42-44 refer to a group of servants rather than a single servant. But what does it matter if these verses apply to one servant or a group? The distinction is as significant as whether we view the Apostles as a fixed group or an expandable one. Some believe that the Lord selected twelve apostles and intended for that number to remain unchanged. Those who hold this view see the teachings of these twelve as God's message and reject any teachings that conflict with theirs. On the other hand, some assert that the number of apostles is not fixed and that the Church can appoint others with equal authority. I believe this idea is fundamentally incorrect and goes against Scripture. The notion that the servant represents a group that the Church can expand is akin to claiming that the apostles were not a set number chosen by the Lord, allowing for anyone to be added and considered equal in authority to those originally appointed.
Did Brother Russell occasionally call The Watch Tower or The Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society "that servant"? Could it be that he viewed that servant as an Office rather than an individual, believing that the Office he established by forming The WTB&T Society holds greater significance than the person occupying it? I'm confident that Brother Russell never considered such an absurd idea. This notion was created by J. F. Rutherford and his colleagues. Here’s a quote from page 68 of The Watch Tower 1923:
"In connection with his presence and the bar, vest work, the office of that `faithful and wise servant' is important, and is made so by the Lord himself. The one who fills that office is made ruler over all the Lord's goods during the time of his incumbency in office. The office of that `faithful and wise servant' therefore, is a part of the orderly manner in which the Lord carries on his work during his second presence. The office is of far greater importance than the individual who fills the office; for if the officer placed in the office should fail to fill it properly, the office would still exist,, and the Lord could easily appoint or assign some one else to fill that office."
This theory, promoted by J. F. Rutherford and his followers, is fundamentally flawed. It's based on the idea that the Lord established an Apostolic Office that holds more significance than the individuals who occupy it. According to this view, even though the people in the office may pass away, the Office itself continues to exist and can be filled by others. However, we find no biblical evidence to support this claim. It seems clear that the Lord intended for the Apostolic Office to end with the original appointees. In other words, there were meant to be only "Twelve Apostles of the Lamb," whose names are inscribed in the twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:14). The only scenario in which others could replace these divinely chosen servants—the twelve apostles, the seven stars, and that servant—was if they were unfaithful. The Lord himself appeared to plan to fill such gaps, as shown by his choice of a successor for Judas. Just as "that servant" remained the Lord's faithful and wise servant until his death, he did not leave an Office for anyone else to take over, just as the divinely appointed Apostles did not leave an Apostolic Office for successors after them.
This idea that "that servant" refers to an organization rather than a person, and that The Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society aka Governing Body represents "that servant" and serves as the source of Truth, is a misconception that has misled many away from the Lord's "marvelous light" into darkness. Let's consider what Brother Russell has to say about the intended role of The Society as a channel.
"This is a business association merely; it was chartered as a corporation by the state of Pennsylvania, and authorized to hold or dispose of property in its own name as though it were an individual. It has no creed or confession. It is merely a business convenience in disseminating the truth."- Watch Tower, January 1891, p. 16
"Zion's Watch Tower Tract Society is not a ,religious society' in the ordinary meaning of the term; for it has no creed or Confession of Faith. It is purely a business association, whose mission is to serve in a business manner the wishes of its beneficiaries who are represented in its officers."- Watch Tower, October 15, 1894, p. 330.
"Zion's Watch Tower Tract Society is only a business association (has no creed or confession). It merely represents a fund entrusted to its officers for use to the best of their judgment in the spread of the Truth-especially of those truths set forth in Millennial Dawn and Zion's Watch Tower, by means of which many of the donors have been brought, by God's mercy, out of darkness into his marvelous light. The funds donated are under the direction of the Editor (who is President of the Tract Society), just as they were used before the Society was organized."- Watch Tower, August 1, 1895, p. 181.
Who is the faithful and wise steward that his master will appoint over his household to provide them with their necessary food at the right time? Those who have been fortunate enough to understand the Truth—the "food at the right time"—should easily recognize where it came from. We must acknowledge that this "food at the right time" was given by the "Lord of the Harvest" and delivered to us through a servant He chose. Everyone who has come to know the Harvest Truth has done so either directly or indirectly through the ministry of "that wise and faithful servant" - CHARLES T. RUSSELL.
There was no other way to receive the Harvest Message, and those who chose not to accept it through the channel the Lord selected missed out on it.
Berean
Well-Known Member
You're right, Russell never did, but his so-called successors did. The scriptures condemn false prophesying in God's name. The Watchtower notes that predicting a date for the end of the world amounts to false prophesy, if it does not come true.
"True, there have been those in times past who predicted an "end to the world," even announcing a specific date. Yet nothing happened. The "end" did not come. They were guilty of false prophesying. Why? What was missing?
Missing was the full measure of evidence required in fulfillment of Bible prophecy. Missing from such people were God's truths and the evidence that he was guiding and using them." Awake! 1968 Oct 8 p.23
"Political leaders often end up being “false prophets” unable to fulfill their promises. Of course, not every ruler turns out to be a “Hitler,” whose promised “thousand-year reich” proved to be a disastrous 12 years of misrule. ... A very prominent political “prophet” of our present century was the League of Nations, formed in 1919. It foretold a world of lasting peace. But World War II unceremoniously dumped it into a pit of inactivity." Awake! 1981 Dec 8 p.14
It's ironic that the Watchtower condemns other religious and political organizations as false prophets, when it has spent decade's actively predicting wrong "end of the world" dates that did not occur, such as 1918 being the destruction of Christendom, 1925 being the start of the earthly resurrection, 1975 as the end of earth's jubilee, or more recently that the battle of Jehovah would be within the twentieth century. Which they revised the Watchtower in the bound volumes and online edition. There were other dates or time periods for the end, particularly the 1940's during the war.
The Watchtower claims to be a prophet of God, likening itself to the ancient prophets. That's a bold statement, when compared to the accuracy of Watchtower doctrine and the predictions about future dates.
Just recently on JW Broadcast:
“Turn with me please to the book of Amos chapter 3 and notice what Amos 3:7 says. For the sovereign Lord Jehovah will not do a thing unless he has revealed his confidential matter to his servants the prophets.” Doesn't that convey Jehovah's confidence in us, doesn't it indicate his love, his loyalty. Jehovah is actively involved in teaching his people, preparing us for what lies ahead. he's providing us with the understanding that we need when we need it and that is reassuring, isn’t it.” JW Broadcasting—January 2024: Annual Meeting 2023, Part 2, 15:50sec
"Those who do not read can hear, for God has on earth today a prophetlike organization, just as he did in the days of the early Christian congregation." Watchtower, 1964 Oct 1 p.601
"For an answer, people should listen to the plain preaching by the remnant prefigured by Jeremiah, for these preach to men the present-day fulfillment of Jeremiah's prophecies. Who made them a prophet to speak with the authority that they claim? Well, who made Jeremiah a prophet?" Watchtower 1959 Jan 15 pp.39-41
"This was the test - the coming down of fire; and the fulfillment exactly on time has proved that Pastor Russell was one of God's great reformers and prophets." Watchtower 1919 Oct 1 p.297
Berean
Well-Known Member
Have they never?
The Watchtower describes itself as the "modern-day" prophet.
"So, does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come?
These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet?
... This "prophet" was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah's Christian witnesses.
... Of course, it is easy to say that this group acts as a "prophet" of God. It is another thing to prove it. The only way that this can be done is to review the record. Thus this group of anointed followers of Jesus Christ, doing a work in Christendom paralleling Ezekiel's work among the Jews, were manifestly the modern-day Ezekiel, the "prophet" commissioned by Jehovah to declare the good news of God's Messianic kingdom and to give warning to Christendom." Watchtower 1972 Apr 1 pp.197-199 'They Shall Know that a Prophet Was Among Them'
True the Society admitted to their false prophesying. But don't consider them prophecies.
"Jehovah’s Witnesses, in their eagerness for Jesus’ second coming, have suggested dates that turned out to be incorrect. Because of this, some have called them false prophets. Never in these instances, however, did they presume to originate predictions ‘in the name of Jehovah.’ Never did they say, ‘These are the words of Jehovah.’" - Awake! 1993 Mar 22 p.4
But if you claim to speak for Jehovah and Christ, if you claim to be that faithful and discreet slave class appointed by Christ himself. Would that not be "the words of Jehovah"? Or were these simply words of men, speaking without authority? And if they misled you with false hopes and predictions, one must wonder where else they have misled you. Ironically, when it suits them, they love to quote Brother Russell. In the same quote above, they write:
The Watchtower, the official journal of Jehovah’s Witnesses, has said: “We have not the gift of prophecy.” (January 1883, page 425) “Nor would we have our writings reverenced or regarded as infallible.” (December 15, 1896, page 306)
But those were the words of That Faithful and Wise Servant, NOT the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Similar threads
