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

[RedFan]

and how do you determine what is the Lord's word and the governing body's opinion? Can you question the governing Body?

I question pretty much everything when it comes to interpreting Scripture! But studying how others have interpreted ti through the centuries is certainly an aid.

 

[Keiw]

I question pretty much everything when it comes to interpreting Scripture! But studying how others have interpreted ti through the centuries is certainly an aid.

Here is Jesus' advice about listening to his appointed ones taking the lead= Luke 10:16--Its exactly the same as listening to Jesus and God, thus vica versa. If one rejects what they teach its the same as rejecting Jesus and God. Its really a very sad thing when a haughty heart actually thinks they know truth before the ones appointed by Jesus do. See Matt 24:45--truth comes through the ones Jesus appointed, at the proper time, they in turn share those truths to the domestics( flock). A domestic NEVER knows a truth before the ones appointed to take the lead in Jesus' religion.

 

[Berean]

Here is Jesus' advice about listening to his appointed ones taking the lead= Luke 10:16--Its exactly the same as listening to Jesus and God, thus vica versa.

I'm sorry, where in this verse does it say that? Jesus was speaking of himself. He said:

"And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd."​

​

He said "My voice", not a governing body. You can't equate John 10:16 to Matthew 24:45.

If one rejects what they teach its the same as rejecting Jesus and God. Its really a very sad thing when a haughty heart actually thinks they know truth before the ones appointed by Jesus do. See Matt 24:45--truth comes through the ones Jesus appointed, at the proper time, they in turn share those truths to the domestics( flock). A domestic NEVER knows a truth before the ones appointed to take the lead in Jesus' religion.

Where in the world do you come up with this nonsense???

 

[PS95]

Here is Jesus' advice about listening to his appointed ones taking the lead= Luke 10:16--Its exactly the same as listening to Jesus and God, thus vica versa. If one rejects what they teach its the same as rejecting Jesus and God. Its really a very sad thing when a haughty heart actually thinks they know truth before the ones appointed by Jesus do. See Matt 24:45--truth comes through the ones Jesus appointed, at the proper time, they in turn share those truths to the domestics( flock). A domestic NEVER knows a truth before the ones appointed to take the lead in Jesus' religion.

LOL! Keiw, NO, Jesus ACTUALLY did send THEM with HIS GOSPEL!!! Not the 1914 fake news.
RUN from AWAY them Keiw! their food is POISON & you will be paid your wages of DEATH!!!!!! /--------- RUN TO JESUS!!

 

[Berean]

I question pretty much everything when it comes to interpreting Scripture! But studying how others have interpreted ti through the centuries is certainly an aid.

I question everything, even from the most trusted sources. We're told to "test all things." 1 Thess 5:21 Not just accept them. Even the Bereans in Acts 17 examined everything Paul wrote to them. Examing the scriptures making sure everything he said was truth. Paul said even if an angel came down and preached another gospel, don't accept it. Galatians 1:8.

Shouldn't we do the same?

 

[Keiw]

I'm sorry, where in this verse does it say that? Jesus was speaking of himself. He said:

"And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd."​

​

He said "My voice", not a governing body. You can't equate John 10:16 to Matthew 24:45.


Where in the world do you come up with this nonsense???

I had Luke 10:16 about listening to the ones Jesus appointed.

 

[Keiw]

LOL! Keiw, NO, Jesus ACTUALLY did send THEM with HIS GOSPEL!!! Not the 1914 fake news.
RUN from AWAY them Keiw! their food is POISON & you will be paid your wages of DEATH!!!!!! /--------- RUN TO JESUS!!

Some of 1914 was fact. He confused the ride of the white horse( Rev 6:2) for this ride(Rev 19:11)--human error.

 

[Berean]

I had Luke 10:16 about listening to the ones Jesus appointed.

My mistake. Luke 10:16 - "He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.”

And this has what to do with the Governing Body?

 

[Keiw]

My mistake. Luke 10:16 - "He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.”

And this has what to do with the Governing Body?

It speaks of Jesus appointed teachers=Matt 24:45--yes the governing body. There was a governing body in the bible after Jesus death. Paul and Barnabas had a disagreement about uncircumcised ones, they went to Jerusalem in front of the apostles and elders( gov body) to get the matter settled. They both agreed with the results told to them because they applied Luke 10:16)

 

[Berean]

It speaks of Jesus appointed teachers=Matt 24:45--yes the governing body. There was a governing body in the bible after Jesus death. Paul and Barnabas had a disagreement about uncircumcised ones, they went to Jerusalem in front of the apostles and elders( gov body) to get the matter settled. They both agreed with the results told to them because they applied Luke 10:16)

Hmmm ... you do realize that the term "governing body" never appears in the Scriptures. So how does the Watchtower justify a Governing Body when the term doesn't exist in the Bible?

What about the issue of circumcision discussed in Acts chapter 15? On this occasion, it can't be said that the decision was made by an established governing body. Let's look at Acts 15:2:

"… they arranged for Paul and Barnabas and some others of them to go up to the apostles and older men in Jerusalem regarding this dispute."

Rather than showing the existence of a small number of 12 leaders being referred to as a governing body, Acts describes a large gathering. This was comprised of the apostles, older men (elders), Paul and Barnabas, who were traveling missionaries, and others. This large group combined to decide on an important issue affecting the local congregations.

The history of the Apostle Paul also shows that there was no centralized governing body directing the early Christians. After Paul's conversion, he did not convene with a governing body or go to Jerusalem to receive an assignment. Rather, he immediately embarked on his missionary work under direction of the Holy Spirit. Paul did not make his first trip to Jerusalem until three years AFTER his conversion, and even then he didn't meet with a group of leaders, but just with Peter and James.

Galatians 1:17-19 "Neither did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles previous to me, but I went off into Arabia, and I came back again to Damascus. Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and I stayed with him for fifteen days. But I saw no one else of the apostles, only James the brother of the Lord."

Paul then didn't go back to Jerusalem for another 14 years (Galatians 2:1-3), possibly for the occasion described in Acts 15.

Schaff's History of the Christian Church shows that after the issue of circumcision was resolved, "we have no trace of Councils before the middle of the second century."

What exactly does chapter 15 say? Does it use the term "governing body"? Does it say the apostles alone were involved in this doctrinal decision? Not at all.

Acts 15:22,23 "Then the apostles and the elders, together with the whole congregation, decided to send chosen men from among them to Antioch, along with Paul and Barnabas; they sent Judas who was called Barsabbas and Silas, who were leading men among the brothers. They wrote this and sent it through them:"

Decision making was not vested in a small group of leaders. Rather the congregation, including the apostles, elders, Paul and Barnabas all were involved in coming to agreement on the issue and composing the letter to distribute their findings. A small, controlling group of leaders did not have total power over the early Christian congregations.

 

[Keiw]

Hmmm ... you do realize that the term "governing body" never appears in the Scriptures. So how does the Watchtower justify a Governing Body when the term doesn't exist in the Bible?

What about the issue of circumcision discussed in Acts chapter 15? On this occasion, it can't be said that the decision was made by an established governing body. Let's look at Acts 15:2:


Rather than showing the existence of a small number of 12 leaders being referred to as a governing body, Acts describes a large gathering. This was comprised of the apostles, older men (elders), Paul and Barnabas, who were traveling missionaries, and others. This large group combined to decide on an important issue affecting the local congregations.

The history of the Apostle Paul also shows that there was no centralized governing body directing the early Christians. After Paul's conversion, he did not convene with a governing body or go to Jerusalem to receive an assignment. Rather, he immediately embarked on his missionary work under direction of the Holy Spirit. Paul did not make his first trip to Jerusalem until three years AFTER his conversion, and even then he didn't meet with a group of leaders, but just with Peter and James.


Paul then didn't go back to Jerusalem for another 14 years (Galatians 2:1-3), possibly for the occasion described in Acts 15.

Schaff's History of the Christian Church shows that after the issue of circumcision was resolved, "we have no trace of Councils before the middle of the second century."

What exactly does chapter 15 say? Does it use the term "governing body"? Does it say the apostles alone were involved in this doctrinal decision? Not at all.


Decision making was not vested in a small group of leaders. Rather the congregation, including the apostles, elders, Paul and Barnabas all were involved in coming to agreement on the issue and composing the letter to distribute their findings. A small, controlling group of leaders did not have total power over the early Christian congregations.

neither does the word trinity. But a group of men like the ones Paul and Barnabas went to, to settle the matter can be called a governing body. What they said was FINAL.

 

[Berean]

neither does the word trinity.

I agree, but assuming I'm a trinitarian was your first mistake.

But a group of men like the ones Paul and Barnabas went to, to settle the matter can be called a governing body. What they said was FINAL.

"but" nothing. how many times did this so-called governing body convene? Do you have scriptures?

 

[Keiw]

I agree, but assuming I'm a trinitarian was your first mistake.

"but" nothing. how many times did this so-called governing body convene? Do you have scriptures?

They were appointed by Jesus-They had holy spirit leading them. One doesn't need scriptures, just the fact that Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem to present their case in front of them. It was like the Israel religion had-The sanhedrin.

 

[Berean]

They were appointed by Jesus-They had the holy spirit leading them. One doesn't need scriptures, just the fact that Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem to present their case in front of them. It was like the Israel religion the Sanhedrin.

The Sanhedrin is scriptural, but the governing body is not.

But as you say you don't need scripture, make it up, teach it and people will accept it.

 

[Marymog]

I didn't say only Catholics did that.

QUOTE FROM YOU: Thus in Catholicism pictures of Jesus they show all creation Jesus bringing dishonor to his Fathers name by him having long hair in their pictures--

Show me in that quote where you said others (Protestants) did that!

You crack me up.....

 

[Berean]

Here is another fact-- 1Cor 11:14--Its a dishonor for an Israelite male to have long hair.)))) With the exception of the Nazarites, God made a special covenant with them( Samson was one) they weren't allowed to cut their hair. Jesus was not a Nazarite, he was a Nazarene. Thus in Catholicism pictures of Jesus they show all creation Jesus bringing dishonor to his Fathers name by him having long hair in their pictures--Thats pretty simple bible milk, yet they cannot understand it. Call no man Father= pretty simple bible milk yet they cannot understand it-WHY?

What about a beard, did Jesus have a beard. You do realize that the Society use to draw pictures of Jesus clean-shaven

 

[Keiw]

The Sanhedrin is scriptural, but the governing body is not.

But as you say you don't need scripture, make it up, teach it and people will accept it.

Light= Paul and Barnabas went in front of the apostles and elders to Jerusalem to get a matter settled--Just as one would go in front of the Sanhedrin to get a matter settled. Acts 15:2 explains it.

 

[Keiw]

QUOTE FROM YOU: Thus in Catholicism pictures of Jesus they show all creation Jesus bringing dishonor to his Fathers name by him having long hair in their pictures--

Show me in that quote where you said others (Protestants) did that!

You crack me up.....

I stated a fact, Catholicism displays Jesus bringing dishonor to his Fathers name in their pictures of him. I never said others don't do the same. Your concern is mainly Catholicism.

 

[Keiw]

What about a beard, did Jesus have a beard. You do realize that the Society use to draw pictures of Jesus clean-shaven

They have changed the view on beards, its allowed now. I seriously doubt they ever had pictures of Jesus without a beard, it was Gods law Israelite males must have a beard. If they did however have corrected what would be error, where as the religions in darkness refuse to make correction.

 

[Berean]

I seriously doubt they ever had pictures of Jesus without a beard, it was Gods law Israelite males must have a beard. If they did however have corrected what would be error, where as the religions in darkness refuse to make correction.

Hmmmm ....