jehovah witnesses

  • Thread starter Thread starter pr35120
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have visited a few around the world. They are really peaceful, beautiful places.
I don’t know how to answer your opinion that lots are getting thrown out and not cared about anymore, and this is proof the JW’s don’t show love. All fully understood what Bethel is about, applied to serve and were invited. I know several who have done this. Some stayed for years. None were under any dellusion they would be set up for life.
Click to expand...
I have an obvious question here…

IF there is NO set time they will be received to stay - then how does a single person know if they should eliminate a rental or rid themselves of a mortgage?

Because if they are given a small allowance - then it would be impossible to pay a mortgage.

If the time is undetermined - and as one poster said - no real notice of being removed - then how do they accomodate for such an undeniably apathetic method of operation?

At least in the seminary - they are interviewed and assessed first - to see if they would be able to remain or not.
It doesnt usually come as a sudden surprise, nor should it.

Buddhists are also peaceful. I dont think that is a mark of truth.

I think the whole bethal thing is cultish. And here is why - they are not anything doing for the world they judge - they are doing it for one religion only. They dont care about going into savage lands and risking their lives to convert others.

They did however wait until the Catholic missionaries did this over the centuries - only to come in and bring the tares amongst the wheat.

I see no courage in how they work.

I apologise…its just from personal experience and debate with friends and an ex boyfriend that I know what they teach.
And how distorted their NWT Bible is. It definitely contradicts the ancient texts still on hand !
 
One other issue I have with JW’s is that they are not taught anything from college, but consider themselves scholars. Studying by themselves.

It takes years of study to undertand the actual ancient Greek - so whatever they think they are learning is what Peter warned against.

Peter said - NOT to wrest the scriptures or Epistles of Paul for ourselves - lest it leads to our own destruction [condemnation from God]

Even the Eunich said he could not understand scripture if a man didnt help him. [A man such as Philip who was a choosen man of God] - who was taught by the teachings of Jesus those 40 days post resurrection.

How does a religion assume to know in 1879 that they understand anything - if Peter already warned this would condemn them?
 
Welcome back Regardless, hope you stay for a while. Do you have any friends that would join you on this forum? We would like to have them also.
First question. Give me the reasons why JWs forbid blood transfusions>
 
Regardless,
I realize you have a lot of posts to go back through, but do you have any thoughts about my comments on war in posts 114 and 115?
 
I am curious why they debunked their own 1914 dogma. The past few years deserting their core belief.

Members were excommunicated over this - and in 1995 they debunked their own false prophecy of 1914?

🤷 Anyone?

Some interesting things I found in discussions that I think need addressed by JW’s in here.

**
**WILLIAM MILLER **
Click to expand...
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/132920/1.ashx THE BEGINNING of it ALL

(If you go to this link you will see where the 1914 ‘Millerite math’ came from)**
**
**
Quite a bit of watchtower chronology hangs on
1914 being the year that Daniel’s prophecy of the end of the gentile times being right, which is why they hang on to 607 being the date for Jerusalem’s destruction by the Babylonians, despite so much archaelogical evidence that says the year was 586/587.
Click to expand...
Apart from Jesus return, inspection and appointing of the fds, their grandiose theory about the 7 trumpets of Revelation 8 being 7 conventions held by the jws, or bible students as they were then known, between 1922 and 1928 would be shown to be the bs it obviously is if they abandoned 607 and 1914.

Why is the world still messed up if satan is locked up?
 
pr35120 said:
are they the true religon. i know some people are going to bring up their past.i want everyone to answer honestly.every religon has made mistakes.we cant deny that.other than their mistakes in the past, whats wrong with them, now.ive noticed, when it comes to them, everyone brings up their past mistakes.now there are pretty major.but they have been also in other religons.i do not agree with a lot of their issues.but i just like everybody to look at it in the now.just like to know what everybody says,when they do that.my own opinion, i think their is two, guys we should look up and no one else. we know who they are.i think sometimes we get wrapped up in our own religon,and down things that are different.and not of our own. we cant respectfully, respect one another. now dont get me wrong,when i bring this up with them…they said what all you guys are about to say.sad i think
Click to expand...
I’ve had a couple of JW’s visit my house four times now.
We’ve had healthy discussions and I find nothing convincing in their talking points.
Their interpretations of scripture is so out-of-context on almost every point.
Even where there is a difference in text (‘God’ versus ‘a god’), they can’t change the context.
I find the history of their fairly new religion suspect at best.

This doesn’t speak against the character of these fine gentlemen or any of their fellow JWs.
I just don’t find their interpretations even close to something I would call sound reasoning.

michel
 
WarriorAngel said:
One other issue I have with JW’s is that they are not taught anything from college, but consider themselves scholars. Studying by themselves.

It takes years of study to undertand the actual ancient Greek - so whatever they think they are learning is what Peter warned against.
Click to expand...
Of the six men that ‘translated’ the JW’s New World Translation, only one had any education to speak of.

Franz, who was the Main translator, took liberal arts sequence at University of Cincinnati; 21 semester hours of classical Greek, some Latin. Partially completed a two-hour survey course in Biblical Greek in junior year; course titled “The New Testament–A course in grammar and translation.” Left in spring of 1914 before completing junior year. Self-taught in Spanish, biblical Hebrew and Aramaic.

Don’t see how Franz can be considered qualified to do as the JWs claim, to have gone back to the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts and fully translate the texts.

michel
 
WarriorAngel said:
I am curious why they debunked their own 1914 dogma. The past few years deserting their core belief.

Members were excommunicated over this - and in 1995 they debunked their own false prophecy of 1914?

🤷 Anyone?

Some interesting things I found in discussions that I think need addressed by JW’s in here.
**

Why is the world still messed up if satan is locked up?
Click to expand...
your right, i mentioned it to one and he acts like its not true or doesnt know what im talking about.i mentioned the organ transplant thing and all the the false prophecies, that they use to not believe that michael was jesus, all this stuff, most of his answers are that they learned from their mistakes, and at least they learn from their mistakes,because no other religon wants to learn from theirs. and its the same ,and then he said,if it is true its nothing like what the catholics did during the holucost.the reason why this even came up, is because we were talking about the vatican dening the holucost, then here we go with the judging. then i told him that to remember what it said in the bible about judging. then he said you still have to have common sense.then i said before you pass judgement you have to make sure your rightous and have no fault in your own life or religon.i had to slow it down before it got to far, plus he wants me to show him proof for everything i say, from a biased scholar.im not as knowledgeable as other people on these forums.like i said before, once you alter the bible,you have no credibilitty.once you start acting like a god and telling the future and claim to be " the one" ,amoungst other things , youre in trouble.
 
pr35120 said:
your right, i mentioned it to one and he acts like its not true or doesnt know what im talking about.i mentioned the organ transplant thing and all the the false prophecies, that they use to not believe that michael was jesus, all this stuff, most of his answers are that they learned from their mistakes, and at least they learn from their mistakes,because no other religon wants to learn from theirs. and its the same ,and then he said,if it is true its nothing like what the catholics did during the holucost.the reason why this even came up, is because we were talking about the vatican dening the holucost, then here we go with the judging. then i told him that to remember what it said in the bible about judging. then he said you still have to have common sense.then i said before you pass judgement you have to make sure your rightous and have no fault in your own life or religon.i had to slow it down before it got to far, plus he wants me to show him proof for everything i say, from a biased scholar.im not as knowledgeable as other people on these forums.like i said before, once you alter the bible,you have no credibilitty.once you start acting like a god and telling the future and claim to be " the one" ,amoungst other things , youre in trouble.
Click to expand...
i found this study done on Hitler - [speaking of Vatican and Holocaust]
And i wish ppl knew how many lives were saved by Rome sneaking many folks there and that 3 million Polish Catholics were killed either saving and hiding Jews - or because they were the clergy of the Church which Hitler hated.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/facts/fm0110.htm

Ok, sorry to digress.
Back to the topic.

I will wait for answers.
 
There are indeed many horror stories out there. And concepts such as only 144,000 people being in the actual presense of the Lord or Saint Michael, or whatever it is, is very hard to grasp. However I will make two positive points:
  1. The JW’s I have know were serious about God and their religion.
  2. The were serious about living virtuous lives.
Personally, I know many Catholics who don’t at all take there religion seriously (even though it is the true religion). Which one is in a better situation with The Lord. I don’t know!
 
bkropp said:
There are indeed many horror stories out there. And concepts such as only 144,000 people being in the actual presense of the Lord or Saint Michael, or whatever it is, is very hard to grasp. However I will make two positive points:
  1. The JW’s I have know were serious about God and their religion.
  2. The were serious about living virtuous lives.
Personally, I know many Catholics who don’t at all take there religion seriously (even though it is the true religion). Which one is in a better situation with The Lord. I don’t know!
Click to expand...
i do agree with you on that one
i also respect people on their views and religons
but the fact is, they dont
 
Benjamin8o8 said:
Jews believe in hell,why wouldn`t we?
Click to expand...
Well said! 😉

I don’t think they always did though. Greek philosophy had a big influence on them, like it did on Christianity.
The jews own holy books (ie. our old testament) says the dead are unconcious. Eccl 9:5, 10.
(The hebrew word translated “grave” in verse 10 is translated “hell” elsewhere in Bible)
Daniel was told he would rest, then come back to life (Daniel 12:13) A resurrection!
A resurrection fits with what Jesus said about the dead in John 5:28, 29. And Paul later agreed, as does Revelation.

So if the dead are not concious, and they will come back in the resurection, even the wicked ones, - How does that fit with hell being a place of suffering where bad people can never get out?

If the Bible is God’s word it must all agree.
 
Rolltide said:
God was not “on” either side. God supports just actions, and wants us to obey His laws. God forbids killing in the Ten Commandments, and yet… it IS just to kill in self-defense (in certain very limited circumstances).
In the case of World War II, action prevented the extinction of many groups (including your own), and despite the horrendous death toll, probably saved even more lives from being lost.
Click to expand...
Very thorough post Rolltide! I have just quoted a bit above. 114, 115 were very extensive. Superb. 🙂
Sorry i can’t answer all replies. I will have to quit work or something. 😃

I didn’t know the infallible pope thing was limited. Only used twice so far eh? Interesting.
yes, I know some of Benedicts family (a cousin I think) are witnesses. Saw a newspaper clip once. he rang her up and said: “Hi! I’m the pope now!” 😃 How bizarre would that be?
he told her the witnesses were doing the work (preaching) the catholic church should be doing.

I have seen Valkyrie. Also I once saw a movie on a lone priest who spoke out against the Nazis and got executed (beheaded I think) for it. Might that be the St. you mentioned?
Bravo to those who stood up to the Nazis.
I don’t believe the Popes were nazis. I know Benedict wasn’t enthusiastic in the ‘Hitler Youth’ and deserted from his army unit.
That Pacelli (Pius XII) didn’t speak out is a big moral debate that is still blazing amoung historians it seems. That he secretly rescued those doomed is most commendable.

Cardinal Pacelli (later pope) signed the Reich concordant in 1933 between the vatican and Germany, which did much to legitimise the rising Nazi power on the world stage. As the danger of the Nazis became clear, and during the war and holocaust, he didn’t speak out against them. I sort of get the feeling (excuse me) he was hedging his bets incase the Nazis won.
Therefore, brave fellows like the priest you mentioned had to act on their own christian concience, not because the church supported them.
Someone asked (not sure if it was you) for proof the Church supported the Nazis. I don’t believe the pope did, but they need only go to Google images and type: “Nazi catholic” and many photos pop up of Bishops and cardinals saluting and smiling among nazi officials. Why wouldn’t they? Their Church had given no lead.
One third of Germany was Catholic. her allies italy, hungary and Romania were almost 100% catholic. I assume their armies had the same ratio.
I believe the Nazis were a major tool used by Satan. I can’t justify God’s church being so involved with them.

Please excuse me, I’m not trying to be a pious gloating pup, digging up mud on them. But it is significant stuff, that is often glossed over.
 
ricko said:
Welcome back Regardless, hope you stay for a while. Do you have any friends that would join you on this forum? We would like to have them also.
First question. Give me the reasons why JWs forbid blood transfusions>
Click to expand...
Hi Ricko.
Acts 15:28,29.
👍
 
Regardless said:
Hi Ricko.
Acts 15:28,29.
👍
Click to expand...
Although I am Not a JW, I did study with them for years, so I can answer this question. (by the way I don’t agree with all their thoughts on this answer.)

They believe that “Life” is in the blood. Without blood in the body, life can’t go on. In the OT animals were to be “blead out” and man wasn’t to eat the blood of any animal.

JW’s feel that getting a blood transfussion is the same at “eating” the blood, even though it is giving through the veins. They do however accept IV’s that are filled with blood building fluids, yet no blood in the IV’s, such as Meds, Salin Water, and other blood building fluids to have the persons own body reproduce blood cells.) Sorry I can’t remember all the “terms”.

Now what does shock :eek: and surprise me is that JW’s and a number of them that I know personally, love a good Rare Steak to eat. This doesn’t make sense to me at all. But to be fair I will tell how it was explained to me about eating Rare Steak to be ok.

I was told that even though there would be blood consumed with a rare steak, even though all the blood was not cooked out of the meat, that this was ok, because the animal when killed had been bleed out when it was butchered.

Now most of us know a Rare Steak comes on your plate with tons of fresh red blood still ozzing out of it. The meat is not cook, but browned on the outside layer.

I must admit the topic of Blood Transfussions is one that “Turned the Light” on for me when studying with JW’s. Although I do think that using blood building fluids, instead of blood transfussions is a good idea, if one’s life is not in danger without the Real blood, but in no way do I see where Scripture says Blood Transfussions would be wrong, like the JW’s seem to see it.

Ok that’s the reason, hope this helps.
 
Regardless said:
Well said! 😉

I don’t think they always did though. Greek philosophy had a big influence on them, like it did on Christianity.
The jews own holy books (ie. our old testament) says the dead are unconcious. Eccl 9:5, 10.
(The hebrew word translated “grave” in verse 10 is translated “hell” elsewhere in Bible)
Daniel was told he would rest, then come back to life (Daniel 12:13) A resurrection!
A resurrection fits with what Jesus said about the dead in John 5:28, 29. And Paul later agreed, as does Revelation.

So if the dead are not concious, and they will come back in the resurection, even the wicked ones, - How does that fit with hell being a place of suffering where bad people can never get out?

If the Bible is God’s word it must all agree.
Click to expand...
I think its backwards. Modern Jews nowadas dont believe in it. But the old traditionals do. This is why its logical to believe.

If there was no hell,why did the faithless person ask Jesus how to get to heaven? Why didnt Jesus say, dont worry about it, you`ll get there no matter what?
 
Regardless said:
Very thorough post Rolltide! I have just quoted a bit above. 114, 115 were very extensive. Superb. 🙂
Sorry i can’t answer all replies. I will have to quit work or something. 😃

I didn’t know the infallible pope thing was limited. Only used twice so far eh? Interesting.
yes, I know some of Benedicts family (a cousin I think) are witnesses. Saw a newspaper clip once. he rang her up and said: “Hi! I’m the pope now!” 😃 How bizarre would that be?
he told her the witnesses were doing the work (preaching) the catholic church should be doing.

I have seen Valkyrie. Also I once saw a movie on a lone priest who spoke out against the Nazis and got executed (beheaded I think) for it. Might that be the St. you mentioned?
Bravo to those who stood up to the Nazis.
I don’t believe the Popes were nazis. I know Benedict wasn’t enthusiastic in the ‘Hitler Youth’ and deserted from his army unit.
That Pacelli (Pius XII) didn’t speak out is a big moral debate that is still blazing amoung historians it seems. That he secretly rescued those doomed is most commendable.

Cardinal Pacelli (later pope) signed the Reich concordant in 1933 between the vatican and Germany, which did much to legitimise the rising Nazi power on the world stage. As the danger of the Nazis became clear, and during the war and holocaust, he didn’t speak out against them. I sort of get the feeling (excuse me) he was hedging his bets incase the Nazis won.
Therefore, brave fellows like the priest you mentioned had to act on their own christian concience, not because the church supported them.
Someone asked (not sure if it was you) for proof the Church supported the Nazis. I don’t believe the pope did, but they need only go to Google images and type: “Nazi catholic” and many photos pop up of Bishops and cardinals saluting and smiling among nazi officials. Why wouldn’t they? Their Church had given no lead.
One third of Germany was Catholic. her allies italy, hungary and Romania were almost 100% catholic. I assume their armies had the same ratio.
I believe the Nazis were a major tool used by Satan. I can’t justify God’s church being so involved with them.

Please excuse me, I’m not trying to be a pious gloating pup, digging up mud on them. But it is significant stuff, that is often glossed over.
Click to expand...
Does anyone at all really think the Pope speaking out against Hitler would have made him stop? Or even slow down?

No.

He hated Catholics ALMOST as much as Jews. He found religion irreprehensible and used religious ties to further himself to the position he needed for power. Nothing more.

He was a social darwinist.
He believed in ethnic cleansing to remove the unfit - and leave only the fittest to live. He loved darwinism. He believed in that - not religion.

So for the Pope to say anything would have been like a gnat speaking to him. He would have just swatted it out of the way.

The Pope was smarter than that to know - it wouldn’t matter.
 
Regardless said:
Well said! 😉

I don’t think they always did though. Greek philosophy had a big influence on them, like it did on Christianity.
The jews own holy books (ie. our old testament) says the dead are unconcious. Eccl 9:5, 10.
(The hebrew word translated “grave” in verse 10 is translated “hell” elsewhere in Bible)
Daniel was told he would rest, then come back to life (Daniel 12:13) A resurrection!
A resurrection fits with what Jesus said about the dead in John 5:28, 29. And Paul later agreed, as does Revelation.

So if the dead are not concious, and they will come back in the resurection, even the wicked ones, - How does that fit with hell being a place of suffering where bad people can never get out?

If the Bible is God’s word it must all agree.
Click to expand...
I understand that when Jesus descended to the dead (not Hell as we think today), he was preaching to those that had passed before.
I see the Jewish idea of the dead being unconscious fitting perfectly with Catholic teaching.

I’m not sure I would agree that that Jews thought the wicked ones would go to heaven.

michel
 
Regardless said:
Hi Ricko.
Acts 15:28,29.
👍
Click to expand...
Thank you both for your replies about blood transfusions. Many times a verse is used to prove a point without really understanding what the verse is saying. Acts 15:28 says “It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and ours too, not to lay on you any burden beyond that which is strictly necessary, namely to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood…” So the decision from the council of Jerusalem was to refrain from eating certain foods. The bible cannot contradict itself yet it appears to be doing so here by forbidding certain foods. For elsewhere the bible says, “A man of sound faith knows he can eat anything…” Romans 14:2, “The kingdom of God is not a matter of eating or drinking…” Romans 14:17, “Now food does not bring us closer to God. We suffer no loss through failing to eat and we gain no favor by eating” 1Cor. 8:8. "eat whatever is sold in the market…eat whatever is placed before you. 1Cor 10:25 “Everything God created is good, NOTHING is to be rejected…” 1Tim 4:4. So what are we to believe? The above Scripture makes it very clear that nothing is forbidden and there is more scripture to that fact. You have to understand what the ruling at the Jerusalem Council was about in other words take it in its contex. There was a group of Jews who were complaining about the new Christian gentiles, they wanted the gentiles to observe the Jewish customs and were, well rocking the boat. Acts 15:10 says “Why then do you put God to the test by trying to place on the shoulders of these (gentiles) converts a yoke which neither we nor out fathers were able to bear?” This was Peter speaking to the Jews about the gentiles. Clearly he did not want to do anything but since the Jews (Pharisees) “created dissension and much controversy between them and Paul” Peter and the council ruled to abstain from the eating of blood. This was not a law of God but more of a judicial requirement. Additionally this judgement did not apply to all as the letter was delievered only to Antioch. The law to refrain from eating of blood was only to appease this small group called Judizers (spelling?) and applied only in two or three places. In about 100 years the last of these Jews died and with him the prohibition against eating blood in those areas also died.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top