po18guy
Well-known member
It is substantially the same, but language has been changed in support of JW doctine.
I don't get how JW's believe Charles Taze Russell had any legitimate authority for his teachings.
- Status
T
TobyLue
Guest
BibleSteve
Oh, so you then consider the WT and Awake magazines to be anti-JW? I’m only quoting what your organization has published. How about it Steve, tell us why they have changed so many of their prophecies which according to the WT are God’s and not mans?
V
VWcrazy
Guest
I would like to know the exact Book, Chapter, and verse which specifically authorized Charles Taze Russell to establish the JWs and the Watchtower.
Also, would like to know the exact Book, Chapter, and verse which authorizes the JWs to compile their own canon and to create their NWT.
Lastly (at least for now), the specific Book, Chapter, and verse which states that Awake and other writings by the Watchtower are to be published.
Also, would like to know the exact Book, Chapter, and verse which authorizes the JWs to compile their own canon and to create their NWT.
Lastly (at least for now), the specific Book, Chapter, and verse which states that Awake and other writings by the Watchtower are to be published.
B
BibleSteve
Guest
Dear VWcrazy,
First, think about your questions from your own Catholic perspective. Ask each of these questions about the Catholic Church, the Pope, and anything the Catholic Church has published.
N
NanaR
Guest
Hi MH84:
My family has all the old Watchtower literature, as my great-great-grandfather joined the Bible Students in the late 1800s.
I have a scanned copy of the page in question uploaded here:
webs.ashlandctc.org/rleone/DOC021408.pdf
The scripture citation (i.e., Heb. 1:6) is omitted, but the portion in quotes is an exact quotation from the KJV rendering of Heb. 1:6.
If you read the entire article, you see that Russell at that time held many ideas that are very different from the current Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Any inquiry into what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe and teach must be qualified by a time statement. I was born into the JW faith in 1952, and personally lived through many doctrinal changes.
We must continue to persevere in prayer for Bible Steve and all Jehovah’s Witnesses that they be granted the grace of Faith.
Thanks be to God that I will soon be Catholic!
Pax,
Ruth
Who will be baptized at the Easter Vigil 2008 – March 22
M
MH84
Guest
Thanks for providing the evidence of your claims. And straight from the horse’s mouth.Hi MH84:
My family has all the old Watchtower literature, as my great-great-grandfather joined the Bible Students in the late 1800s.
I have a scanned copy of the page in question uploaded here:
webs.ashlandctc.org/rleone/DOC021408.pdf
The scripture citation (i.e., Heb. 1:6) is omitted, but the portion in quotes is an exact quotation from the KJV rendering of Heb. 1:6.
If you read the entire article, you see that Russell at that time held many ideas that are very different from the current Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Any inquiry into what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe and teach must be qualified by a time statement. I was born into the JW faith in 1952, and personally lived through many doctrinal changes.
We must continue to persevere in prayer for Bible Steve and all Jehovah’s Witnesses that they be granted the grace of Faith.
Thanks be to God that I will soon be Catholic!
Pax,
Ruth
Who will be baptized at the Easter Vigil 2008 – March 22
I hope all goes well for your upcoming baptism.
B
BibleSteve
Guest
I could just as easily go to any of the many blatant anti-Catholic sites and copy/paste all sorts of quotes and activities by the Catholic church and attack you and your faith. However, it’s against forum rules. And, for you to come in this thread mocking my username, insulting, and using JW’s as your human-pinata is also breaking forum rules. Since I am held to these forum rules, it’s only fair you are also.
If you have a polite question, I’d be glad to answer it for you.
To humor you, I’ll consider your reference to JW’s “changing their prophecies”.
Jehovah’s Witnesses have never made a prophecy. In fact, from the outset of the organization, Jehovah’s Witnesses have specifically and emphatically said in writing we are not inspired, we’re not making inspired prophecies, and we’re don’t claim infallibility.
1883 Watchtower: “We have not the gift of prophecy”
1896 Watchtower: "Nor would we have our writings reverenced or regarded as infallible, or on a par with the holy Scriptures. **The most we claim or have ever claimed for our teachings is, that they are they are what we believe to be harmonious interpretations **of the divine word…
1947 Watchtower: “This pouring out of God’s spirit upon the flesh of all his faithful anointed witnesses does not mean those now serving as Jehovah’s witnesses are inspired. It does not mean that the writings in this magazine, The Watchtower are inspired and infallible and without mistakes. It does not mean that the president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society is inspired and infallible, although enemies falsely charge us with believing so. We leave it to the pope of Vatican City to claim infallibility, and therefore divine inspiration, in matters of Roman Catholic faith and doctrine according to his decree of A.D. 1870. But we confess with the Scriptures that the day of such inspiration passed long before 1870, as the apostle Paul showed it would. Inspiration, including the inspired speaking and writing, was once a gift of the spirit…Inspired speaking and writing passed away with the last of the twelve apostles… While confessing no inspiration for today for anyone on earth, we do have the privilege of praying God for more of his holy spirit and for his guidance of us by the bestowal of his spirit through Jesus Christ…While we do not have, expect or hope for direct visions or inspired dreams, we can study the visions and dreams of his faithful men of old… While none of us can produce inspired speech and writings, God has committed his inspired Bible to us and we can govern ourselves by it’s inspired commandments
Catholic.com in their library article “Stumpers for Jehovah’s Witnesses” claims:
“The WTS…claims to be God’s inspired prophet”.
That does not appear to be a truthful statement, does it?
po18guy
Well-known member
Praise God in Heaven! We, too, continue to pray that the Holy and unchanging Spirit of God will reveal the Divine and Eternal truth to BibleSteve in the fullness of His own time. Steve loves Christ enough to follow Him wherever He leads. Thank the Lord! And, “welcome home”! This makes the Lenten season just that much more spiritual and blessed.Hi MH84: My family has all the old Watchtower literature, as my great-great-grandfather joined the Bible Students in the late 1800s. I have a scanned copy of the page in question uploaded here: webs.ashlandctc.org/rleone/DOC021408.pdf
The scripture citation (i.e., Heb. 1:6) is omitted, but the portion in quotes is an exact quotation from the KJV rendering of Heb. 1:6.
If you read the entire article, you see that Russell at that time held many ideas that are very different from the current Jehovah’s Witnesses. Any inquiry into what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe and teach must be qualified by a time statement. I was born into the JW faith in 1952, and personally lived through many doctrinal changes. We must continue to persevere in prayer for Bible Steve and all Jehovah’s Witnesses that they be granted the grace of Faith. Thanks be to God that I will soon be Catholic!
Pax,
Ruth
Who will be baptized at the Easter Vigil 2008 – March 22
The peace of Christ be always with you.
N
NanaR
Guest
Bible Steve:
If you would include all the information from the Catholic.com site, you would have given these fine folks the reference information for their statement.
The sentence says:
The WTS maintains that it is God’s reliable mouthpiece to the nations, and it claims to be God’s inspired prophet (WT, 4-1-1972, 197)
Now I looked up the April 1, 1972 Watchtower. You might want to take a look at page 197. The article is “They Shall Know that a Prophet Was Among Them”.
I’m not going to cut and paste this article. These fine Catholic folk do not need to read it.
But you should retract your statement that the Catholic.com quote is not accurate. It is completely accurate – and backed up by a reference that can be accessed.
But then the 1972 article was written in the heat of the 1975 fever… If you have only been a Witness for 30 years, you may not know much about that.
Go back and read the 1972 article. Then get back to me, okay?
Pax,
Ruth
S
sklemetti
Guest
This creates many other questions:
Why does it matter whether or not, you “get” something?
Why does Russell need any authority for his teachings besides the Bible?
Why are you asking this when you know that his legitimate authority was the Bible?
Why are you asking about Russell who died in 1916?
Why do you not find information about Jehovah’s Witnesses from the Witnesses themselves?
Such as go to www.jwproclaimers.org to get real information about Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Why does it matter whether or not, you “get” something?
Why does Russell need any authority for his teachings besides the Bible?
Why are you asking this when you know that his legitimate authority was the Bible?
Why are you asking about Russell who died in 1916?
Why do you not find information about Jehovah’s Witnesses from the Witnesses themselves?
Such as go to www.jwproclaimers.org to get real information about Jehovah’s Witnesses.
B
BibleSteve
Guest
Dear Ruth,
I stand by the statement and ask that you look up the article. The phrase “inspired prophet” is never used. JW’s have emphatically denied being “inspired prophets” verbally and in writing from inception. So, the Catholic quote is absolutely an inaccurate quote:
Catholic.com specifically says: “The WTS… claims to be God’s inspired prophet” and quotes the 1972 WT Article. That is a false statement… emphatically denied in multiple articles for over a hundred years.
You are correct the article used the word “prophet” and it should be noted that throughout the article it puts in “quotes”. Let me ask…why do people using “quotes” around certain words?
If I say I say it’s always a “joy” to speak with JW-critics and they are always so “polite” what am I REALLY saying? That I’m using the word in a **figurative **way, suggesting something other than how the word is commonly used and understood.
The 1972 article puts the word “prophet” in quotes because it was using it in the same figurative way. The Pope himself has used the phrase in the same way.
JW’s have long noted and used the word “prophet” with multiple meanings including simple talking or witnessing to others about the Bible:
Even your own Pope has said figurative things like this:
In 1984, Pope John PaulII addressed the following message to a gathering of Bible-loving Catholics: “I send cordial greetings to those who are participating in the General Assembly of the World Catholic Federation for the Biblical Apostolate and I assure them of my spiritual closeness. I am happy to be informed that this assembly has found inspiration for its theme in the words of Moses, ‘Would that all were prophets’ (Num 11:29), and that it has applied this expression to the tasks that it will undertake.”—L’Osservatore Romano, August24, 1984.
Here’s some more from your Pope:
Exhorting the Federation to review its goals, Pope John Paul said in his message: “The commitment of the Federation is one of helping Catholics all over the world to have easy access to the Word of God. ... Indeed all activity and all witness in the Church should flow from the living Word ... The ‘prophetic office’ of the People of God must be consciously exercised as a true service of the Word. ... By participation in the work of translation, publication and the diffusion of the Word, one is engaged in satisfying the needs of those who hunger and thirst for the Word of God (cf.*Amos 8:11). This applies as well to the work of forming those who will one day dedicate themselves to teaching and preaching Holy Scripture.”
In line with its theme, in its final declaration this Catholic Biblical assembly stated: ]“The Federation is aware that if all the People of God are to play their prophetic part, they must have access to the Word of God (their personal copy of the Bible in their own language). They have the right to be trained in the knowledge of Scripture . . . This Assembly reaffirms that the Church’s work of evangelization is centered on the Bible.”
So, what is it? Is the Pope claiming that all Catholics are “prophets”, involved with a “prophetic” work, or is it clear he was simply using the phrase like we have in a figurative way to describe “evangelization”?
I 100% stand by my statement that the claim on Catholic.com is a misquote. That 1972 article they quoted never claimed we were “inspired prophets” and we have never made that claim ever.
V
VWcrazy
Guest
BibleSteve,
This didn’t answer the questions. Please show the exact Book, Chapter, and Verse.
B
BibleSteve
Guest
You are asking me for what you can’t provide regarding your own Church.
Where in the Bible can I read about “the Catholic Church”? Where do I see the “Catholic Church” receiving the “authorization”? Where do I see the “Catholic Church” being authorized to write anything?
There was a congregation started at Pentecost, but where in the Bible does it explain that was your Catholic Church? I know you assume that is the case, but where’s the proof you are demanding from me?
I am not being disrespectful to you or your faith. I’m simply testing your assumption behind demanding an answer from me that you can’t answer yourself.
Where is the Book/Chapter/Verse mentioning of the “Holy Father,” or a pope, a college of cardinals, archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs, monsignors, right reverends, priests, abbots, monks and nuns?
What is the Book/Chapter/Verse where I’ll see the words: trinity, purgatory, mass, immortal soul, lent, novenas, indulgences, penances, holy water, veneration of Mary, the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary?
So, when you demand book/chapter/verse to indicate where Russell or JW’s have authority you should first realize there is no mention in the Bible that the group of true disciples formed at Pentecost was the Catholic Church…
R
Ravyn_Guiliani
Guest
I believe the OP was addressing JWs —not Catholics. If you want to ask a Q about Catholicism then the appropriate forum would be Apologetics. Steve you should know that answering a question with a question is no answer at all and is in fact nothing more than a diversionary tactic to avoid answering a question you are uncomfortable with. Your “answers” (notice the quotes) sound like the little kid who says “Why can’t I do it? He does!”
You and I both know the authority Russell and JWs believe they have comes from the convoluted explanation of the Faithful and Discreet Slave ala the Watchtower. Why don’t you explain THAT one to everybody?
B
BibleSteve
Guest
Well then, I will pass on the question.
If someone demands of me to see where in the Bible it authorizes Jehovah’s Witnesses to publish a Watchtower magazine, I think it’s a goofy question. The person asking should first ask himself the same question in reverse: “Where does the Bible authorize my Church to publish our magazine?”
If he can’t answer the question related to his own church, it’s a Ignoratio elenchi. There’s your word lesson for the day
R
Ravyn_Guiliani
Guest
Wow is that warped reasoning. How do you know the person has not already answered the question? In fact I would think most every one has or else why be the religion they have chosen to be? but since this is the Non Catholic Forum and the question was addressed to JWs, then I don’t see how anyone has the responsibility to report to you (or anyone else) if they have answered that question to themselves or not. Talk about a red herring.
I am surprised you don’t take advantage of the opportunity (“buy out the opportune time” as the JWs would say) to explain the Faithful and Discreet Slave tho…
And by the way the question was not “where in the Bible it authorizes Jehovah’s Witnesses to publish a Watchtower magazine”— it was how do JWs believe Russell had the legitimate authority for his teachings. See the title of the thread.
You are getting sloppy Steve. Maybe you are tired. Or stressed.
(Sincerely–it isn’t worth getting frazzled over. There are more important things, take a break. <not facetious)
B
BibleSteve
Guest
There’s multiple discussions going on in this thread around a specific question. I was responding to VWcrazy’s question:
I was simply trying to emphasize the point these type of questions fall into a category of Ignoratio elenchi, a irrelevant conclusion, thesis, etc.)
VWCrazy asks a question that obviously can’t be answered thinking he’ll make a point. Of course the same silly questions could be asked of the Catholic Church, and won’t be able to be Scripturally answered.
I guess that goes over a few heads here.
So, I’ll just ignore his demands that I haven’t answered his question.
R
Ravyn_Guiliani
Guest
I believe the scriptures would be basially the same in the answers for Catholics or JWs—with more of the emphasis on Peter as the pre-eminent apostle given the authority to establish the Church from Catholics. The difference is that history proves this Church became known as the Catholic Church whereas JWs believe that there was some kind of underground movement all thru the centuries that eventually came out of hiding in 1879 with Russell’s development of Zion’s Watchtower and ultimately called JWs by Rutherford.
But seriously Steve don’t make me get out the old Truth book and explain to everyone the Faithful and Discreet Slave…it is too much like having to give a talk on the Ministry School! And I am sure you would not be happy with my personal slant since my schizophrenic father partook since 1974 (and still does I think). You might consider my opinions on it biased.
B
BibleSteve
Guest
Dear VWcrazy,
After further reflection, I don’t think your questions are silly at all. In fact, I think they are good questions. And, I had overlooked the obvious Scriptural Answer…
(Matthew 28:19) Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations…
This verse is not only an authorization, it is also a command that applies to any and all people who view themselves as disciples of Jesus.
This verse applies, to me, to you, to Russell, and even your Pope.
“Go make disciples…”
That’s what Russell did. He made disciples by preaching the message verbally. He made disciples by preaching the message on the printed page.
He made disciples that obeyed the command at Heb 10:24, 25 to meet together as a group:
(Hebrews 10:24-25) And let us consider one another to incite to love and fine works, 25*not forsaking the gathering of ourselves together, as some have the custom, but encouraging one another, and all the more so as YOU behold the day drawing near.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are also authorized and commanded to “make disciples” by Jesus Christ himself.
In order to “make disciples”, they’ve translated the Bible into hundreds of languages and have preached, making disciples throughout the entire inhabited earth in fulfillment of Matt 24:14.
So, there you go. Book/Chapter/Verse.
After further reflection, I don’t think your questions are silly at all. In fact, I think they are good questions. And, I had overlooked the obvious Scriptural Answer…
And the answer is:
(Matthew 28:19) Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations…
This verse is not only an authorization, it is also a command that applies to any and all people who view themselves as disciples of Jesus.
This verse applies, to me, to you, to Russell, and even your Pope.
“Go make disciples…”
That’s what Russell did. He made disciples by preaching the message verbally. He made disciples by preaching the message on the printed page.
He made disciples that obeyed the command at Heb 10:24, 25 to meet together as a group:
(Hebrews 10:24-25) And let us consider one another to incite to love and fine works, 25*not forsaking the gathering of ourselves together, as some have the custom, but encouraging one another, and all the more so as YOU behold the day drawing near.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are also authorized and commanded to “make disciples” by Jesus Christ himself.
In order to “make disciples”, they’ve translated the Bible into hundreds of languages and have preached, making disciples throughout the entire inhabited earth in fulfillment of Matt 24:14.
So, there you go. Book/Chapter/Verse.
S
swariffin
Guest
Dear Steve,
Can you find the name Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush or the incoming President of the US elected in 2009 in the constitution of the US? The bible was written while Peter was still alive. No way you can find the successor of Peter named in the bible, and it is not logical to ask.
- Status