Reasons why the Jehovah’s Witness religion is false (Despite my love for them as human beings)

[Aunty Jane]

You studied a false Bible for 50 years, and deny the Incarnation as a result. Nobody has the authority to say who is saved and who isn't. That's up to God.

Have you ever heard our side of that story?
The NWT wasn’t published till 1961 and I was a student of the Bible for two years before I committed myself in baptism to Jehovah as a disciple of Christ. I studied my own Bible (the KJV) and also consulted other translations for comparison throughout that period….and I soon got to see the errors that were promoted by the translators of the KJV, when I compared it with other translations….not just the NWT.

Today, I still use a variety of translations, along with Strongs Concordance and an Interlinear…..I study God’s word….I don’t just read it. Original language word studies reveal a lot.

As far as who gets to determine who is saved and who is not…that is absolutely up to God’s appointed judge, who himself said that we have to “know the only true God AND the one he sent” (John 17:3) if we want everlasting life…..
So do we? If this was a settled question then the issue could never have been raised in the first place. One clear statement from either the Father or the son would have settled it once and for all…..yet there is no such statement, and the question is still hotly debated.
For a foundational belief to have no clear statement as to its truth, is odd, don’t you think?

No, we will be judged by the way we lived our lives, which includes an authentic concern for our suffering neighbor.

Love of God and his truth comes before love of neighbor. Some of the greatest humanitarians in today’s world are atheists…what does that tell you? Love of neighbor comes because we love God and would rightly help anyone in need. (The parable of the Good Samaritan was a blow to the Pharisees because Jesus made a hated Samaritan the hero, whilst the priest and the Levite were the bad guys) How many church run charities today are thinly disguised businesses with highly paid CEO’s?

The minorities were heretics, as legions of made-in-America Bible cults are today.

The minorities were the reason why the Catholic church lost its strangle hold on the people…..they dared to say what others were thinking, but were too scared to come forward…..thank God for Luther! He did not want to create a new religion…all he wanted to do was to clean up a corrupted church system, but the church wasn’t going to put up with that…..just like the Pharisees in Jesus day, they fought tooth and nail to hold onto their power.
They could not be corrected even by the son of God…..neither can the Catholic church, for the same reason.

The Bible was translated in numerous languages before the English language existed. You should ask yourself why "sola scriptura" is a Latin phrase.

Perhaps because the Latin church wanted to promote something other than “sola scriptura”…..which should be the sole arbiter of truth….God’s inspired word cannot be overpowered by a corrupted church, no matter what language they use.

The NWT is a travesty of the Scriptures for two main reasons:

First, of the five men who comprised the translation committee–Nathan Knorr, Fred Franz, Albert Schroeder, George Gangas, and Milton Henschel–Franz is the only one who had any knowledge at all of the biblical languages. Franz studied Greek for only two years (not biblical Greek, though), and he was allegedly self-taught in Hebrew. The other four men completely lack any credentials that would qualify them as competent biblical scholars.

These men did not translate the NWT…
The efforts of the New World Bible Translation Committee were directed towards rendering the canonical Hebrew Scriptures into modern English. As the Hebrew text for translation, the Committee used principally the edition known as the Biblia Hebraica produced by the late Rudolf Kittel and his surviving colleagues and published in a number of editions by the Privilegierte Wuerttembergische Bibelanstalt of Stuttgart, Germany. In this edition the endeavor was made to get back to the Biblical text by Moses ben Asher, considered to be the greatest Masoretic scribe in preserving the traditional form and pronunciation of the Hebrew text.

As to the Christian Greek Scriptures, the New World Translation is based on the Westcott and Hort Greek text, whereas the King James Version was based on what is referred to as a Textus Receptus or “Received Text.” How good was this Received Text?
There was no question about its being the Word of God. However, it did leave much to be desired as far as accuracy was concerned, and that for more than one good reason. Erasmus, a leading scholar of the time, was commissioned to rush through a Greek “New Testament.” This Erasmus did in ten months, and it appeared in 1516. Because of the haste with which he worked, its text was filled with errors.

First of all, Erasmus was able to consult only a handful of Greek manuscripts. Even more serious was the fact that all of these were of late origin. As a rule, the older a handwritten manuscript is, the fewer copying errors it is likely to have. Then there was also the matter of the haste with which Erasmus did his work. He himself admitted that his edition was “rushed through rather than edited.”

The New World Bible Translation Committee adhered, not to the catalogue of the religious Council of Carthage of 397, but to the catalogue of sacred books that have been proved to be Scripturally canonical, in agreement with divine truth, from first to last. Great care was given to the authenticity of the translation by using the work of respected scholars. It took 12 years, 3 months, and 11 days of painstaking work to complete the task…..not something thrown together by amateurs.

Second, the text of the NWT is distorted and twisted in a manner to suit the erroneous beliefs of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Numerous examples could be cited. For instance, John 1:1, in the NWT, reads that the Word was ” a god” (rather than “God”) because JWs deny the divinity of Christ. Similarly, in Colossians 1:15-20, the NWT inserts the word “other” into the text four times because JWs believe that Christ was created. Also, in Matthew 26:26, the NWT reads “this means my body” (rather than “this is my body”) because JWs deny the Real Presence.

JW’s do not deny the divinity of Christ…..He was “the son of God” as he expressly stated. (John 10:31-36)….we reject that he was deity, which is another story…..

As for the bread and wine used at the last supper, it is nonsense to suggest that Jesus was giving his apostles his literal flesh and blood to consume, as he was still alive at the time he instituted his memorial.
The bread and wine are clearly representations of his flesh and blood. He would never have suggested breaking God’s law by implying that cannibalism and the consumption of blood could ever be part of his teachings. (Lev 17:10-12)

 

[RLT63]

Have you ever heard our side of that story?
The NWT wasn’t published till 1961 and I was a student of the Bible for two years before I committed myself in baptism to Jehovah as a disciple of Christ. I studied my own Bible (the KJV) and also consulted other translations for comparison throughout that period….and I soon got to see the errors that were promoted by the translators of the KJV, when I compared it with other translations….not just the NWT.

Today, I still use a variety of translations, along with Strongs Concordance and an Interlinear…..I study God’s word….I don’t just read it. Original language word studies reveal a lot.

As far as who gets to determine who is saved and who is not…that is absolutely up to God’s appointed judge, who himself said that we have to “know the only true God AND the one he sent” (John 17:3) if we want everlasting life…..
So do we? If this was a settled question then the issue could never have been raised in the first place. One clear statement from either the Father or the son would have settled it once and for all…..yet there is no such statement, and the question is still hotly debated.
For a foundational belief to have no clear statement as to its truth, is odd, don’t you think?

Love of God and his truth comes before love of neighbor. Some of the greatest humanitarians in today’s world are atheists…what does that tell you? Love of neighbor comes because we love God and would rightly help anyone in need. (The parable of the Good Samaritan was a blow to the Pharisees because Jesus made a hated Samaritan the hero, whilst the priest and the Levite were the bad guys) How many church run charities today are thinly disguised businesses with highly paid CEO’s?

The minorities were the reason why the Catholic church lost its strangle hold on the people…..they dared to say what others were thinking, but were too scared to come forward…..thank God for Luther! He did not want to create a new religion…all he wanted to do was to clean up a corrupted church system, but the church wasn’t going to put up with that…..just like the Pharisees in Jesus day, they fought tooth and nail to hold onto their power.
They could not be corrected even by the son of God…..neither can the Catholic church, for the same reason.

Perhaps because the Latin church wanted to promote something other than “sola scriptura”…..which should be the sole arbiter of truth….God’s inspired word cannot be overpowered by a corrupted church, no matter what language they use.

These men did not translate the NWT…
The efforts of the New World Bible Translation Committee were directed towards rendering the canonical Hebrew Scriptures into modern English. As the Hebrew text for translation, the Committee used principally the edition known as the Biblia Hebraica produced by the late Rudolf Kittel and his surviving colleagues and published in a number of editions by the Privilegierte Wuerttembergische Bibelanstalt of Stuttgart, Germany. In this edition the endeavor was made to get back to the Biblical text by Moses ben Asher, considered to be the greatest Masoretic scribe in preserving the traditional form and pronunciation of the Hebrew text.

As to the Christian Greek Scriptures, the New World Translation is based on the Westcott and Hort Greek text, whereas the King James Version was based on what is referred to as a Textus Receptus or “Received Text.” How good was this Received Text?
There was no question about its being the Word of God. However, it did leave much to be desired as far as accuracy was concerned, and that for more than one good reason. Erasmus, a leading scholar of the time, was commissioned to rush through a Greek “New Testament.” This Erasmus did in ten months, and it appeared in 1516. Because of the haste with which he worked, its text was filled with errors.

First of all, Erasmus was able to consult only a handful of Greek manuscripts. Even more serious was the fact that all of these were of late origin. As a rule, the older a handwritten manuscript is, the fewer copying errors it is likely to have. Then there was also the matter of the haste with which Erasmus did his work. He himself admitted that his edition was “rushed through rather than edited.”

The New World Bible Translation Committee adhered, not to the catalogue of the religious Council of Carthage of 397, but to the catalogue of sacred books that have been proved to be Scripturally canonical, in agreement with divine truth, from first to last. Great care was given to the authenticity of the translation by using the work of respected scholars. It took 12 years, 3 months, and 11 days of painstaking work to complete the task…..not something thrown together by amateurs.

JW’s do not deny the divinity of Christ…..He was “the son of God” as he expressly stated. (John 10:31-36)….we reject that he was deity, which is another story…..

As for the bread and wine used at the last supper, it is nonsense to suggest that Jesus was giving his apostles his literal flesh and blood to consume, as he was still alive at the time he instituted his memorial.
The bread and wine are clearly representations of his flesh and blood. He would never have suggested breaking God’s law by implying that cannibalism and the consumption of blood could ever be part of his teachings. (Lev 17:10-12)

You still got into a banned subject.

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

Here are the ones in Jesus day who were Gods chosen scholars--Teaching Jesus got his power from Demons. Matt 12:24)--Catholicism and protestants have shown 100% mass of confusion to all of creation. Not all is as appears in a satan ruled system. You quote these-2Cor 11:12-15)

Maybe you missed these facts--In the Lords prayer, Jesus shows the #1 issue for all involved is his Fathers name.
Jesus' God and Father inspired every word of his bible-He put his name in over 7000 spots because it is his will for his name to be there.
Wicked men by satan's will who had no right removed Gods name and replaced it with titles-to mislead.
Which version do you think Jesus would use? Which version do you think Jesus' 1 true religion would use? The translation that out of love and respect for Gods will put his name back in support of Gods will. Or the altered versions that give support to satans will over Gods will? Truly Jesus would say to you--Only false religions use the altered versions that mislead.

Try commenting on the content of my posts instead of unrelated irrelevant anti-Catholic traditions of men. If you can't or won't discuss like an adult, I'll commend you to care of St. Ignora.

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

JW’s do not deny the divinity of Christ…..He was “the son of God” as he expressly stated. (John 10:31-36)….we reject that he was deity, which is another story…..

NWT Incarnation theology follows the Modernist heretics from the 18th century. Did Chuck Taze leave the Congregationist community on his own, or did he get thrown out? Enquiring minds want to know.

 

[Aunty Jane]

NWT Incarnation theology follows the Modernist heretics from the 18th century. Did Chuck Taze leave the Congregationist community on his own, or did he get thrown out? Enquiring minds want to know.

What on earth has that got to do with anything…are you just going to dish the dirt now that you have no rebuttal?
We don’t know any Chuck Taze……any more than you know someone named Jorge Mario Bergoglio as your pope….

Russell and his colleagues were from different denominations, but dissatisfied and disenchanted with the clearly corrupt and inept church system, they were united in their search for the truth of the Bible, so they undertook careful study of just the scriptures themselves, without the input of commentaries of the so called scholars who really can’t even agree with each other…..pick your scholars. Pick your translation.

They basically threw out all preconceived ideas taught by Christendom and her many denominations, and allowed the Bible to speak for itself…..they were shocked at how much the Catholic church in particular, had added to what the scriptures taught. So they systematically eliminated from their list of biblically based beliefs anything that was brought in from outside of scripture. That is why we have no beliefs in common with the church system that evolved from the RCC. All are based on a Catholic foundation…..not on the Bible.

If it’s not scriptural and backed up by the rest of the Bible, we rejected it. It’s amazing how simple things became once all the excess baggage was thrown out the door.

 

[Aunty Jane]

You still got into a banned subject.

Did I jump or was I pushed?
I was simply answering questions that were put to me or correcting incorrect statements made about my brotherhood.
Crying “banned topic” doesn’t make the subject go away. I should at least be allowed to defend myself and my brothers from defamation and inaccurate accusations.

What should be banned is not the topic, but the people who cannot discuss a topic in a mature and civil way. This is the “Unorthodox Forum” so all unorthodox topics should be allowed here.…otherwise what is the point of it? Ban the bad behavior not the subject matter.

Those who just want to present empty arguments and resort to immature name calling should stay out...or be escorted out. Put in the naughty corner like the infants that they show themselves to be.

 

[TheHC]

No need. JW's murdered their own people by the false belief of refusing blood transfusions.

As for Trinitarian churches: That is a big tent you are painting there. Trinitarians would be both Protestant, and Catholic churches. It would also include non-denominational churches, as well (of which you really cannot pigeon hole so easily).

I am not Catholic, and I disagree with their unbiblical sinful practices that I believe are also evil.

As for Protestants: Well, I'm not really Protestant in my view of salvation, either. I do not agree with Martin Luther's evil statements (if they are true), like him saying: “No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day."

Even a blind squirrel can find a nut. So while the majority of churches may hold to a particular true teaching, that does not mean that they are correct on other things. Protestants and Catholics differ greatly among themselves but they both are in error in different ways. Granted, Protestantism is more correct than Catholicism, but Protestantism still has it's problems. Again, that does not mean the Bible does not plainly teach the Trinity. It does. Well... that is if you believe the Bible. If you don't, then there is no point in having this discussion. For faith comes by hearing and hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17).



What is worse than all that? The Jews killing their own Messiah who is the creator of the Universe and their Savior. Of course, many Jews at Pentecost repented of that. Why don't you join them?



I am not in support of them. So you are barking up the wrong tree.



Sorry. They are not my churches. I don't agree with Protestantism and Catholicism.
I just believe the Bible (Old and New Testament).
Jesus and the apostles never would have condoned the actions of Protestants and Catholics (let alone their odd beliefs and traditions).
But again, that does not mean the Trinity is not taught in the Bible.
As I said, a blind squirrel can find a nut.



Again, they are not my churches.
I don't fully agree with Protestant churches and or Catholic churches.
The only good thing that came out of the Protestant church was the Bible.
Other than that, I am not buying their man made traditions that makes void the Word of God.
Sure, Protestants may get a few key doctrines correct, but that does not mean they don't have a false view of faith, sin and salvation.



Jesus taught Non-Violence in the New Testament. So His true followers throughout history were Non-Violent.
Who are they? Only God knows them. I am not sure it is recorded in man's popular history books. My church is not Protestant or Catholic, but I seek to be of the body of Christ that is closest to the early church we read about in Scripture. That to me is the true church of Christ today and throughout history. But your big name brand churches? Yeah, okay. You can falsely associate me with them if you like. But it would not be true.

Now, we finally get some clarity!!(Well, I guess this was a while back.)
Thanks, @Matthias & @quietthinker , for helping to expose that in the OP’s eyes, no organized religious group is good enough!

(But he ‘loves’ them, nonetheless.)

FYI, the very first source that the OP linked to, he misrepresented what the source itself had written. (Regarding the divorce of C.T.Russell.)
There’s something in the Bible about lying.

If anyone here would like to amiably discuss any of the JW theological accusations presented, I’d be happy to do so. Privately maybe would be best.

 

[TheHC]

was divorced in 1911 by his wife because he his immoral acts with other women (Source).

If we want to keep it very brief as to why the Jehovah's Witnesses cult is dangerous, we just need to remind everyone of the words of Christ in John 8:24: I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I AM [he], ye shall die in your sins.

[Note: The KJV translators did us a great disservice by (a) failing to capitalize "I AM" and (b) then inserting "he" gratuitously into the text. This diluted the impact of this verse. The Jubilee 2000 Bible has translated this verse properly: "Therefore I said unto you that ye shall die in your sins, for if ye do not believe that I AM, ye shall die in your sins."]

What did Christ mean by these words? Since Jesus had already revealed Himself to Moses (Exodus 3) at the burning bush as I AM or I AM THAT I AM (the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob), the Jews He was addressing understood that what Jesus was actually saying is this: IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT I AM GOD YOU WILL BE DAMNED.

So you’re saying the Jews understood that Jesus was claiming to be God?
Well, that would be blasphemy! Why didn’t they kill him? The account (vs59) says, “But Jesus hid and went out of the Temple”, right?
Why didn’t the Jews kill Him the next time they saw Him? There was no statute of limitations… they would have just grabbed Jesus when they next saw Him.

They didn’t.

In fact, all 4 Gospel accounts, like at Matthew 26:59-64 reveal, that at His Sanhedrin trial, although they were looking for even false witnesses to convict Him, they could not find grounds on which to kill Jesus. Until he admitted he was God’s Son.


If John 8:24 & 8:58 is how you described it, they would have had sufficient grounds to kill Jesus that very day! Or the next. Whenever they got around him.
It’s not until John 11:54 that Jesus started to avoid public events.

In fact, in John 11:47-53, please read what the Sanhedrin members were saying: not once did they say that Jesus said he was God.

Did Jesus’ followers believe He was God? Many use John 20:28 to claim that.

Well, what did Jesus’ followers say about him while walking on the road, in Luke 24:15-32 . One named Cleopas said, ““He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. 20The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel.”

There is no ‘Jesus is God’ mentioned. Rather, a ‘powerful prophet before God’ is what he said.

Another account revealing how Jesus’ followers viewed Him, is recorded at Acts 4:23-31. Notice their prayer…. Who were they praying to? Not Jesus, was it?
They referred to Jesus as God’s “Holy Servant.”

They did not claim that Jesus was God. Did they?

Best wishes to you, my cousin.

 

[Marymog]

The minorities were the reason why the Catholic church lost its strangle hold on the people…..they dared to say what others were thinking, but were too scared to come forward…..thank God for Luther! He did not want to create a new religion…all he wanted to do was to clean up a corrupted church system, but the church wasn’t going to put up with that…..just like the Pharisees in Jesus day, they fought tooth and nail to hold onto their power.
They could not be corrected even by the son of God…..neither can the Catholic church, for the same reason.

He AJ,

You are not the first person on here that has said, "thank God for Luther"!

When you thank God for something it suggests you think God wanted it to happen, blessed it, ordained it etc. If you believe that God ordained what Luther did, you must agree with the teachings of the Luteran denomination? I know you are not Luteran, nor do you agree with the doctrines of the Lutheran denomination. Which means you are really thanking God for the division in Christianity of which Luther and all the Reformers brought about. I know you don't agree with the doctrine of any of the original Reformers from the 1500's that brought division to Christianity. It appears you agree with the doctrine of the men from the late 1800's that brought division to Protestantism, the Jehovah Witness denomination. Your church founder, Charles Russell, Reformed the teachings of William Miller who reformed the teachings of the Baptist. So shouldn't you be thanking God for Charles Russell? Or are you thanking God for the starting of the reformation of Christianity in the 1500's which was the catalyst for your man in the 1800's to finally reveal Gods true teaching to the world?

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

What on earth has that got to do with anything…are you just going to dish the dirt now that you have no rebuttal?
We don’t know any Chuck Taze……any more than you know someone named Jorge Mario Bergoglio as your pope….

Russell and his colleagues were from different denominations, but dissatisfied and disenchanted with the clearly corrupt and inept church system, they were united in their search for the truth of the Bible, so they undertook careful study of just the scriptures themselves, without the input of commentaries of the so called scholars who really can’t even agree with each other…..pick your scholars. Pick your translation.

They basically threw out all preconceived ideas taught by Christendom and her many denominations, and allowed the Bible to speak for itself…..they were shocked at how much the Catholic church in particular, had added to what the scriptures taught. So they systematically eliminated from their list of biblically based beliefs anything that was brought in from outside of scripture. That is why we have no beliefs in common with the church system that evolved from the RCC. All are based on a Catholic foundation…..not on the Bible.

If it’s not scriptural and backed up by the rest of the Bible, we rejected it. It’s amazing how simple things became once all the excess baggage was thrown out the door.

Help me out here AJ,

The website of your Protestant denomination has a tab that I can click on that says, "Bible teachings". On that page it says, "What does the Bible really teach?" So are YOU truly 'allowed to let the Bible to speak for itself'? Or do you have to allow your men to tell you what the bible really teaches? If the bible speaks for itself, why do you have to be told what to believe? https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jehovah-witness-beliefs/

If God truly ordained your man, Charles Russell, and we can truly "thank God" for Russell as the man to bring THE truth to Christianity, why has your church Changed Some of Their Beliefs? https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jw-doctrine-changes/

Did God not give Russell the truth and some of your men had to change the truth God gave Russell? Are some of the things Russell taught "not scriptural and backed up by the rest of the Bible"?

Curious Mary

 

[Aunty Jane]

You are not the first person on here that has said, "thank God for Luther"!

When you thank God for something it suggests you think God wanted it to happen, blessed it, ordained it etc.

Is that what I said? I was thanking God (metaphorically) that someone was brave enough to take his own corrupted church to task over their abominable practices, when a climate of fear prevailed and forced others to suffer in silence.
The church was drunk with its own power, and after centuries of abuse, it was time to get the ball rolling so that the stage could eventually be set for the greatest preaching campaign the world has ever seen.
The church was so busy being Catholic however, that it forgot how to be Christian.

If you believe that God ordained what Luther did, you must agree with the teachings of the Luteran denomination? I know you are not Luteran, nor do you agree with the doctrines of the Lutheran denomination. Which means you are really thanking God for the division in Christianity of which Luther and all the Reformers brought about.

Again…no. Change had to come to address the rot that had clearly set in….and there had to be someone brave enough to stand up and tell them to clean up their act…..indulgences….really? It’s like a monopoly game…get out of jail if you pay enough money……how disgusting!…and that wasn’t all….

I know you don't agree with the doctrine of any of the original Reformers from the 1500's that brought division to Christianity. It appears you agree with the doctrine of the men from the late 1800's that brought division to Protestantism, the Jehovah Witness denomination.

The reason why I accept the teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses is because of the timing of their appearance on the world scene….from small beginnings, an unrelated group of men were drawn together who all had the same desire…to study God’s word and rid themselves of the contaminants that had built up over many centuries….just as Daniel had foretold. (Daniel 12:4, 9-10) He said that in “the time of the end” God would cleanse, whiten and refine“ his worshippers, and that there would be an “abundance of knowledge” available at that time. He also said that the wicked would not understand or be given any insight.

Unless the Bible could be placed back into the hands of the people, no one would ever know what it taught……this is why the church got away with so much for so long. No one could check and see that what they were being taught was actually the truth….the church forbade anyone to read or possess a copy of the Bible.

As these last days have progressed, so the limits of our knowledge have expanded into cyberspace…..now we know things that were hidden before. As Jesus said, the truth was like buried treasure….those prepared to dig, found the treasure because it was God’s time to reveal it.

Your church founder, Charles Russell, Reformed the teachings of William Miller who reformed the teachings of the Baptist. So shouldn't you be thanking God for Charles Russell? Or are you thanking God for the starting of the reformation of Christianity in the 1500's which was the catalyst for your man in the 1800's to finally reveal Gods true teaching to the world?

There had to be a catalyst for change and Jesus himself spoke of the situation after he and his apostles were no longer here to oversee the development of the church. They foretold that wolves in sheep’s covering would infiltrate the church and take it down a dark path…..the history of the Catholic church is the story of that sad descent into what became “Christianity”…..or rather Churchianity.

Around the turn of the Century was a period some called “the great awakening”, when many were ready for the change that they knew in their hearts had to come….satan was ready for them too, but what Russell and his associates started became a united global brotherhood who have all achieved what Christendom never has….unity and cohesion despite the fact that we are separated by vast distances, all over the world. (1 Cor 1:10) The preaching of “the good news of the Kingdom” was undertaken and continues to this day, fulfilling what Jesus himself prophesied in Matt 24:14. Who else is known for their preaching work in every nation? Who doesn’t know what JW’s do? Are we popular because of this? No, but we don’t expect to be. (John 15:18-21)

Does the Catholic church prepare its members for lies ahead? Are they informed as to why the world and the entire church system that evolved from the RCC is experiencing so many monumental problems? Where is God according to your church? What is he doing about world conditions? It is his creation that mankind is destroying…..what is God going to do about that? Do Catholics know?

Help me out here AJ,

The website of your Protestant denomination has a tab that I can click on that says, "Bible teachings". On that page it says, "What does the Bible really teach?" So are YOU truly 'allowed to let the Bible to speak for itself'? Or do you have to allow your men to tell you what the bible really teaches? If the bible speaks for itself, why do you have to be told what to believe? https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jehovah-witness-beliefs/

That publication was used some time ago for Bible study. It’s still a favorite of mine actually because it helps to keep Bible studies on topic as it can turn into a shemozzle if it’s haphazard. Jehovah is a God of order. We teach in the same way that Christ’s disciples taught……one truth for all.
Just as your church has teachings that are set as Catholic doctrine, so we have teaching aids to assist us in imparting Bible truth to others…..and no degrees in theology are required.
We have updated our online study publication now to include videos and additional information.

If God truly ordained your man, Charles Russell, and we can truly "thank God" for Russell as the man to bring THE truth to Christianity, why has your church Changed Some of Their Beliefs? https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jw-doctrine-changes/

The link for the explanation is there for all who want to find out…..you posted the link, but did you read it?

Did God not give Russell the truth and some of your men had to change the truth God gave Russell? Are some of the things Russell taught "not scriptural and backed up by the rest of the Bible"?

Well if you have to ask that question, you just answered mine…..read the link you posted.

Matt 24:45. “Food at the proper time”.…indicating a progressive revealing of knowledge.

 

[Marymog]

The link for the explanation is there for all who want to find out…..you posted the link, but did you read it?

I have read the link. The men of your Church changed and added to some of the original teachings of Russell.

If God truly ordained your man, Charles Russell, and we can truly "thank God" for Russell as the man to bring THE truth to Christianity, why has your church Changed Some of Their Beliefs? Why would they change the alleged truth that was originally revealed to them into a NEW truth?

Did God lie to Russell?

 

[Marymog]

Well if you have to ask that question, you just answered mine…..read the link you posted.

Matt 24:45. “Food at the proper time”.…indicating a progressive revealing of knowledge.

Nice dodge AJ.

I have read the links I posted and that is why I am asking you because the links don't answer the question I asked you. You seem to believe what your CURRENT men are telling you is the truth and what Russell originally taught was a lie since what Russell taught has been changed or added to. I am not sure why God lied to Russell and his minions and didn't give them all the truth at the beginning, but your men have to figure that out, not me.

Can we try again?

Did God not give Russell the truth and some of your men had to change the truth God gave Russell? Are some of the things Russell taught "not scriptural and backed up by the rest of the Bible"?

 

[Aunty Jane]

I have read the link. The men of your Church changed and added to some of the original teachings of Russell.

If God truly ordained your man, Charles Russell, and we can truly "thank God" for Russell as the man to bring THE truth to Christianity, why has your church Changed Some of Their Beliefs? Why would they change the alleged truth that was originally revealed to them into a NEW truth?

Did God lie to Russell?

The revelation of truth from God has always been progressive…..the Jews, for example had no knowledge of the kingdom’s ruling from heaven. They assumed that Messiah’s kingdom would be on earth.…that was partly true….the rulership would be over earthly inhabitants, but it’s rulers would reign from heaven. Even the apostles didn’t know that till Pentecost.

God doesn’t lie to anyone…..he just doesn’t tell everything all at once, but reveals things incrementally.
Jesus told his disciples….“I still have many things to say to you, but you are not able to bear them now.” (John 16:12)

Can we try again?

Did God not give Russell the truth and some of your men had to change the truth God gave Russell? Are some of the things Russell taught "not scriptural and backed up by the rest of the Bible"?

You’re not curious Mary, you just want to play mind games….
If you want to play games, go play them with someone else….I’m off to bed….

 

[Marymog]

Is that what I said? I was thanking God (metaphorically) that someone was brave enough to take his own corrupted church to task over their abominable practices, when a climate of fear prevailed and forced others to suffer in silence.
The church was drunk with its own power, and after centuries of abuse, it was time to get the ball rolling so that the stage could eventually be set for the greatest preaching campaign the world has ever seen.
The church was so busy being Catholic however, that it forgot how to be Christian.
Again…no. Change had to come to address the rot that had clearly set in….and there had to be someone brave enough to stand up and tell them to clean up their act…..indulgences….really? It’s like a monopoly game…get out of jail if you pay enough money……how disgusting!…and that wasn’t all….

Thank you for the clarification that you were metaphorically thanking God for Luther dividing Christianity. I agree, there were centuries of abuse in The Church. It needed some changes to root out corruption.

It appears to me that you are saying that Luther (and the other Reformers around that same time) 'got the ball rolling to set the stage' for your man Russell to come on the scene 300 years later with the truth and bring it back to 'being Christian'. Is that the gist of what you are saying?

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

The reason why I accept the teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses is because of the timing of their appearance on the world scene….from small beginnings, an unrelated group of men were drawn together who all had the same desire…to study God’s word and rid themselves of the contaminants that had built up over many centuries….just as Daniel had foretold. (Daniel 12:4, 9-10) He said that in “the time of the end” God would cleanse, whiten and refine“ his worshippers, and that there would be an “abundance of knowledge” available at that time. He also said that the wicked would not understand or be given any insight.

Interesting AJ.....the timing is what sold you?

Did you know that over the last 2,000 years there have been dozens if not hundreds of men who have done the same thing your JW men have done? Why were the JW men the ones you decided to follow and not the dozens of other men that have done the same thing?

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

Unless the Bible could be placed back into the hands of the people, no one would ever know what it taught……this is why the church got away with so much for so long. No one could check and see that what they were being taught was actually the truth….the church forbade anyone to read or possess a copy of the Bible.

Interesting theory, thank you.

How do these facts work into your theory:

For the first 300 years of Christianity 'The Bible' consisted of different books until The Church had a meeting and decided what books would be in our bible.

For the 1st 1,500 years of Christianity the bible generally COULDN'T 'be placed in the hands of the people' because they were handwritten therefore only the rich and the churches had copies of the bible. It wasn't until the printing press came along that the bible GENERALLY was 'placed in the hands of the people'. It took several decades AFTER the printing press for the average Christian to have a copy of the bible in their home.

Most people were illiterate and couldn't read for hundreds and hundreds of years after Scripture was written. Scripture had to be read to them.

Did you know that The Church held classes to teach early Christians about the bible and it took years to finish the classes?

Based on those FACTS your theory makes no sense. The average Christian DID know what the bible taught, that is why they became Christian. They bible was read to them for over a thousand years AND those that could read were able to read it where it was available! Soooo your theory that Christians were being deceived by The Church on what the Bible said is not true.

It was AFTER the bible was put into the hands of the people, because of the printing press, we had division in Christianity. This includes your men who divided themselves from other men and told us THEY have the truth just like the men before them who told everyone THEY have the truth and so on and so on. The men of the Reformation and your men caused opposite of what Jesus prayed for in John 17.

Scripture says, "Faith comes by hearing". Which was true for the first 1,500+ years of Christianity. You seem to be saying Faith comes by reading?

 

[RLT63]

So you’re saying the Jews understood that Jesus was claiming to be God?
Well, that would be blasphemy! Why didn’t they kill him? The account (vs59) says, “But Jesus hid and went out of the Temple”, right?
Why didn’t the Jews kill Him the next time they saw Him? There was no statute of limitations… they would have just grabbed Jesus when they next saw Him.

They didn’t.

In fact, all 4 Gospel accounts, like at Matthew 26:59-64 reveal, that at His Sanhedrin trial, although they were looking for even false witnesses to convict Him, they could not find grounds on which to kill Jesus. Until he admitted he was God’s Son.


If John 8:24 & 8:58 is how you described it, they would have had sufficient grounds to kill Jesus that very day! Or the next. Whenever they got around him.
It’s not until John 11:54 that Jesus started to avoid public events.

In fact, in John 11:47-53, please read what the Sanhedrin members were saying: not once did they say that Jesus said he was God.

Did Jesus’ followers believe He was God? Many use John 20:28 to claim that.

Well, what did Jesus’ followers say about him while walking on the road, in Luke 24:15-32 . One named Cleopas said, ““He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. 20The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel.”

There is no ‘Jesus is God’ mentioned. Rather, a ‘powerful prophet before God’ is what he said.

Another account revealing how Jesus’ followers viewed Him, is recorded at Acts 4:23-31. Notice their prayer…. Who were they praying to? Not Jesus, was it?
They referred to Jesus as God’s “Holy Servant.”

They did not claim that Jesus was God. Did they?

Best wishes to you, my cousin.

This is a closed topic not open for discussion

 

[Marymog]

They foretold that wolves in sheep’s covering would infiltrate the church and take it down a dark path…..the history of the Catholic church is the story of that sad descent into what became “Christianity”…..or rather Churchianity.

Your man Russell broke away from Miller who broke away from the Baptist who broke away from the English separatist's church who broke away from the Church of England who broke away from The Catholic Church.

Based on what you said in the post above it appears that you think that the men who started the JW denomination are NOT wolves in sheep’s covering? All the men BEFORE your JW men are the ones who infiltrated the church and corrupted it?

 

[RLT63]

Did I jump or was I pushed?
I was simply answering questions that were put to me or correcting incorrect statements made about my brotherhood.
Crying “banned topic” doesn’t make the subject go away. I should at least be allowed to defend myself and my brothers from defamation and inaccurate accusations.

What should be banned is not the topic, but the people who cannot discuss a topic in a mature and civil way. This is the “Unorthodox Forum” so all unorthodox topics should be allowed here.…otherwise what is the point of it? Ban the bad behavior not the subject matter.

Those who just want to present empty arguments and resort to immature name calling should stay out...or be escorted out. Put in the naughty corner like the infants that they show themselves to be.

Whoever brought it up is guilty