Jehovah's Witnesses

[yellowbird]

NOW. Yellowbird’s favorite comment: “they claim to be Jehovah’s mouthpiece!” If a person was to only read that comment from the article-- –they would believe we are calming to be Prohpets…BUT if you were a regular reader of the watchtower you would understand without any doubt that Witnesses are not claiming to be “Prophets” foretellers of the future, rather, that they have a commission to preach the ”Good news of the Kingdom” nothing more. NOT prophecy! Matthew 24:14; 2 Tim 4:3-5

From the Watchtower Publications:

So does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of the dangers to come? These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet? . . . This prophet was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was a small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah’s Christian Witnesses (WT, 1 April 1972, 197).

Who will be Jehovah’s prophet? Who will be the modern day Jeremiah? The plain facts show God has been pleased to use Jehovah’s Witnesses (ibid., 15 January 1959, 40-41).

God has on earth a people, all whom are prophets, or witnesses for God . . . Jehovah’s Witnesses (Awake, 8 June 1986, 9).

Again I ask djdave ~ WHY would Jehovah God allow his “witnesses” to spread a false message? The message JWs have preached has been WRONG over & over again. What kind of prophet is that? And I’ll even go with YOUR interpretation of that word… we’ll go with JWs are merely proclaiming His message.

Only for the past 120 years of JW history, either His message keeps changing OR JWs keep getting it wrong. Which is it? If Jehovah were using the WT Organization as His “mouthpiece” wouldn’t He be certain they were telling the truth? God cannot lie. And yet, you’d have me believe that Jehovah’s “mouthpiece” was spreading falsehoods.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Now…Jehovah’s Witnesses are a human organization made up of imperfect humans. We are all being tested as we approach the end. As the light gets brighter IN UNDERSTANDING THE BIBLE. Prov 4:18…, person’s hearts are being examined. Heb 4:12…Just as Jesus wanted to thin out the crowds following him, he spoke about ‘eating his flesh and drinking his blood’. Instead of his followers saying “now I know this man, he would not ask us to go against the Mosaic Law Lev 17:14…so he must mean…” --instead many walked away at the opportunity.

Did you know that Jesus said that in the middle of a Synagogue? John 6:59. Notice too vs 64 “But there are some of YOU that do not believe.” For from [the] beginning Jesus knew who were the ones not believing and who was the one that would betray him.” Many were following him for the wrong selfish reasons. (John 6:26-27) . . .Jesus answered them and said: “Most truly I say to YOU, YOU are looking for me, not because YOU saw signs, but because YOU ate from the loaves and were satisfied. 27. . .
(And yes, we believe it was an illustration not an actual command. See Mathew 13: 34 –we do not force anyone to believe different.)

Do you really think that Jesus expected them to just believe him? After 2,300 years of God’s view on blood? Gen 9:4…even the Apostles were a little doubtful. But they took into account Jesus’ other teachings. “sayings of everlasting life”

IT was asked WHY was the “true knowledge suddenly ‘found’ at the beginning of the 20th century. Notice.
(Daniel 12:3-4) “And the ones having insight will shine like the brightness of the expanse; and those who are bringing the many to righteousness, like the stars to time indefinite, even forever. 4 “And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of [the] end. (not the end of the Jewish Nation in the first century) Many will rove about, and the [true] knowledge will become abundant.”

That ‘roving about’ was in the Bible looking for the true knowledge. It was time for the fulfillment of that prophecy.

Russell and later others wanted to know where the Bible teaches

1.        Where the expression or teaching of immortal soul is in the Bible?

2. Where the Bible teaches Purgatory: Hellfire: compare Jere 7:31
3. Contraception:–that every act of sexual union MUST be open to giving life;
4. Where it was Okay to adapt Pagan rites and sanctify them into the church. Compare 2 Cor 6:14, 15, religionstinks.xanga.com/669573192/item/17
5. Where is states that it is okay to pray to saints when the Bible calls Jehovah the “Hearer of prayer” Ps 65:.
6. Mary was Sinless and was raised bodily without dying;
7. Infant Baptisms. “Households”? compare (1 Samuel 1:21-22) 21 In time the man El•ka′nah went up with all his household to sacrifice to Jehovah the yearly sacrifice and his vow offering. 22 As for Han′nah, she did not go up, for she had said to her husband: “As soon as the boy is weaned, I must bring him, and he must appear before Jehovah and dwell there to time indefinite
   **Compare also:
   it-1 p. 251 Baptism **
   In view of the fact that ‘hearing the word,’ ‘embracing the word heartily,’ and ‘repenting’ precede water baptism (Ac 2:14, 22, 38, 41) and that baptism requires the individual to make a solemn decision, it is apparent that one must at least be of age to hear, to believe, and to make this decision. An argument is made by some in favor of infant baptism. They refer to the instances where ‘households’ were baptized, such as the households of Cornelius, Lydia, the Philippian jailer, Crispus, and Stephanas. (Ac 10:48; 11:14; 16:15, 32-34; 18:8; 1Co 1:16) They believe that this implies that small babies in those families were also baptized. But, in the case of Cornelius, those who were baptized were those who had heard the word and received the holy spirit, and they spoke in tongues and glorified God; these things could not apply to infants. (Ac 10:44-46) Lydia was “a worshiper of God, . . . and Jehovah opened her heart wide to pay attention to the things being spoken by Paul.” (Ac 16:14) The Philippian jailer had to “believe on the Lord Jesus,” and this implies that the others in his family also had to believe in order to be baptized. (Ac 16:31-34) “Crispus the presiding officer of the synagogue became a believer in the Lord, and so did all his household.” (Ac 18:8) All of this demonstrates that associated with baptism were such things as hearing, believing, and glorifying God, things infants cannot do. At Samaria when they heard and believed “the good news of the kingdom of God and of the name of Jesus Christ, they proceeded to be baptized.” Here the Scriptural record specifies that the ones baptized were, not infants, but “men and women.”—Ac 8:12.

….And many more very sincere questions

Continued

Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in Hell” (Matthew 10:28). From the testemony of Chirst the Body and the soul are not one that though the body may die the soul goes on.

infant baptism

“And Peter said to them, 'Repent and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself.” (Acts 2:38, 39)
go to this web site just to give some credaence it is not a Catholic site, but an Orthodox one. and you can read about what is meant by to whole household and the 1 st century Church on baptizing infants.
goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith7067

 

[dj_dave]

[SIGN]QUOTE=dj dave;

I won’t say one way or the other. But, all in all, I have to wonder with such a large group how can they apply Matt 7:13, 14

Conclusion next…[/SIGN]

In conclusion, if none of you accept this brief explanation…your loss. We are not going to drag anyone kicking and screaming into our organization. We have many disfellowshiped people making there way back now. DO ALL of you know that most disfellowshiped persons can come back with in 6 to 12 months if they once again conform their lives to the high moral standards of God’s Word?
Consider our REAL viewpoint on this matter: (yes, I’m going to “cut and Paste”)

*** w81 9/15 pp. 24-26 pars. 21-28 Disfellowshipping—How to View It ***
21 Would upholding God’s righteousness and his Disfellowshipping arrangement mean that a Christian should not speak at all with an expelled person, not even saying “Hello”? Some have wondered about that, in view of Jesus’ advice to love our enemies and not ‘greet our brothers only.’—Matt. 5:43-47.

22 Actually, in his wisdom God did not try to cover every possible situation. What we need is to get the sense of what Jehovah says about treatment of a disfellowshiped person, for then we can strive to uphold His view. Through the apostle John, God explains:
“Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. . . . If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.”—2 John 9-11.

23 The apostle who gave that wise warning was close to Jesus and knew well what Christ had said about greeting others. He also knew that the common greeting of that time was “Peace.” As distinct from some personal “enemy” or worldly man in authority who opposed Christians, a disfellowshiped or disassociated person who is trying to promote or justify his apostate thinking or is continuing in his ungodly conduct is certainly not one to whom to wish “Peace.” (1 Tim. 2:1, 2) And we all know from our experience over the years that a simple “Hello” to someone can be the first step that develops into a conversation and maybe even a friendship. Would we want to take that first step with a disfellowshiped person?

24 ‘But what if he seems to be repentant and needs encouragement?’ someone might wonder. There is a provision for handling such situations. The overseers in the congregation serve as spiritual shepherds and protectors of the flock. (Heb. 13:17; 1 Pet. 5:2) If a disfellowshiped or disassociated person inquires, or gives evidence of wanting to come back into God’s favor, the elders can speak to him. They will kindly explain what he needs to do and might give him some appropriate admonition. They can deal with him on the basis of facts about his past sin and his attitude. Others in the congregation lack such information. So if someone felt that the disfellowshiped or disassociated person ‘is repentant,’ might that be a judgment based on impression rather than accurate information? If the overseers were convinced that the person was repentant and was producing the fruits of repentance, he would be reinstated into the congregation. After that occurs, the rest of the congregation can warmly welcome him at the meetings, display forgiveness, comfort him and confirm their love for him, as Paul urged the Corinthians to do with the man reinstated at Corinth.—2 Cor. 2:5-8.

NOT SHARING IN WICKED WORKS
25 All faithful Christians need to take to heart the serious truth that God inspired John to write: “He that says a greeting to [an expelled sinner who is promoting an erroneous teaching or carrying on ungodly conduct] is a sharer in his wicked works.”—2 John 11.
26 Many of Christendom’s commentators take exception to 2 John 11. They claim that it is ‘unchristian counsel, contrary to the spirit of our Lord,’ or that it encourages intolerance. Yet such sentiments emanate from religious organizations that do not apply God’s command to “remove the wicked man from among yourselves,” that seldom if ever expel even notorious wrongdoers from their churches. (1 Cor. 5:13) Their “tolerance” is unscriptural, unchristian.—Matt. 7:21-23; 25:24-30; John 8:44.

27 But it is not wrong to be loyal to the righteous and just God of the Bible. He tells us that he will accept ‘in his holy mountain’ only those who walk faultlessly, practice righteousness and speak truth. (Ps. 15:1-5) If, though, a Christian were to throw in his lot with a wrongdoer who has been rejected by God and disfellowshiped, or has disassociated himself, that would be as much as saying ‘I do not want a place in God’s holy mountain either.’ If the elders saw him heading in that direction by regularly keeping company with a disfellowshiped person, they would lovingly and patiently try to help him to regain God’s view. (Matt. 18:18; Gal. 6:1) They would admonish him and, if necessary, ‘reprove him with severity.’ They want to help him remain ‘in God’s holy mountain.’ But if he will not cease to fellowship with the expelled person, he thus has made himself ‘a sharer (supporting or participating) in the wicked works’ and must be removed from the congregation, expelled.—Titus 1:13; Jude 22, 23; compare Numbers 16:26. (We have many articles on disfellowshiped relatives in the same household–
treatment is of course a little different)

LOYAL TO GOD’S VIEW
28 Loyalty to Jehovah God and his provisions is a source of happiness, for all his ways are righteous, just and good…

I know you will all have much to say, but, as I stated the links in this post are more than enough to supply our defense. Along with my many other posts.

I’ll be back from time to time but, not for a while…

 

[yellowbird]

II’ll be back from time to time but, not for a while…

Peace be with you.

I will remember you in my prayers.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Genesis 38:8-10

The Bible contains teachings relevant to contraception on a variety of levels. The most direct of these references is Genesis 38:8-10, the Onan Incident:

Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” And Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so it came about that when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground, in order not to give offspring to his brother. But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, so He took his life also.

Though God was certainly displeased with Onan’s disobedience to the Levirate Law: that is, the obligation of a man to sow children with his dead brother’s widow, his punishment for Onan far exceeded the penalty mandated for such a crime. According to Deuteronomy 25:5-10, the penalty is for the slighted widow to publicly humiliate the offender. God’s enactment of the death penalty for Onan indicates a heightened seriousness in the offense. The only additional element to Onan’s refusal to provide offspring is his choice to make the sexual act deliberately infertile by withdrawal.

reguarding Mary

St Luke 1

26 And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of Galilee, called Nazareth, 27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29 Who having heard, was troubled at his saying, and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be. 30 And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God.

Full of grace is another way of saying without sin.

as for celebrating Holidays To think that because there was a pagan festival on or around to same day that a Christian Holiday is held makes it the revamping of that pagan holiday just silly. To quote Forrest Gump " Thats all I have to say about that"

 

[T_More]

[SIGN]QUOTE=dj dave;

I won’t say one way or the other. But, all in all, I have to wonder with such a large group how can they apply Matt 7:13, 14

Conclusion next…

[/SIGN]

In conclusion, if none of you accept this brief explanation…your loss. We are not going to drag anyone kicking and screaming into our organization. We have many disfellowshiped people making there way back now. DO ALL of you know that most disfellowshiped persons can come back with in 6 to 12 months if they once again conform their lives to the high moral standards of God’s Word?
…

Dave, come on. There is more here than meets the eye. The reason many of them come back is because they miss talking to their families and friends. Shunning has a funny way of causing that.

 

[dj_dave]

[SIGN]

Hail, full of grace

, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29 Who having heard, was troubled at his saying, and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be. 30 And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God.

Full of grace is another way of saying without sin.[/SIGN]

OKAY, real quick… the Onan thing was covered in my earlyier posts.

regarding Mary: you all need to read our articles about that wonderful woman!

Pope Pius XII claimed that the Assumption dogma has “its ultimate foundation in the Holy Scripture.” Among the texts often cited as proof of Mary’s sinless assumption is Luke 1:28,42. These verses say of Mary: “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women ..., and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.” (Douay) The assumptionists reason that because Mary was “full of grace,” she must never have been overcome by death. And being “blessed” like the ‘fruit of her womb,’ she must have privileges equal to those of Jesus—including his heavenly ascension.

Language scholars say that the expression “full of grace” is an imprecise translation and that the original Greek expression used by Luke is more accurately rendered “object of the favor of God.” The Catholic Jerusalem Bible thus renders Luke 1:28: “Rejoice, so highly favoured!” There is no reason to conclude that Mary was sinless or assumed bodily into heaven just because she was “highly favored” by God.

The first Christian martyr, Stephen, was likewise spoken of in the Catholic Douay Bible as being highly favored, or “full of grace”—and no SINLESS bodily resurrection has been ascribed to him.—Acts 6:8.

Yet, was not Mary blessed or favored? Yes, but interestingly, the woman named Jael back in the days of Israel’s judges was considered to be “blessed among women.” (Judges 5:24, Dy) Certainly no one would argue that Jael too was taken sinless or bodily into heaven. Besides, the whole idea of the Assumption is based on the premise that Jesus himself ascended to heaven in the flesh. However, the Bible says that Jesus was “enlivened,” or resurrected, “in the spirit.” (1Peter 3:18, Dy; compare 1Corinthians 15:45.) The apostle Paul further says that “flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God.”—1*Corinthians 15:42-50, Dy.

Gotta run

 

[Vasian]

My heart goes out to you.
May our Heavenly Father bless you, and soften your heart.

“Make sure of all things… Hold fast to what is fine…”

Your faith, if it strong, and is in our Heavenly Father, and in our Lord Jesus Christ first, and foremost rather than in the WTS, it will withstand the reading of ANY information about the WTS, be it fact or fiction, will it not?
Consider if you will, those few posts were I have laid out verifiable facts about the WTS.
If you feel that your faith is not up to the task then please do not read it. Too many JW’s I’ve known did not have true faith, and as a result they not only fell away from the WTS, they went off the deep end, and became faithless.
Surely I would not want to see this happen to yet one more who’s faith was in the WTS alone, and not in our Heavenly Father, and in our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

May God be with you…

 

[T_More]

[SIGN]

Hail, full of grace

, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29 Who having heard, was troubled at his saying, and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be. 30 And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God.

Full of grace is another way of saying without sin.[/SIGN]

OKAY, real quick… the Onan thing was covered in my earlyier posts.

regarding Mary: you all need to read our articles about that wonderful woman!

Pope Pius XII claimed that the Assumption dogma has “its ultimate foundation in the Holy Scripture.” Among the texts often cited as proof of Mary’s sinless assumption is Luke 1:28,42. These verses say of Mary: “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women ..., and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.” (Douay) The assumptionists reason that because Mary was “full of grace,” she must never have been overcome by death. And being “blessed” like the ‘fruit of her womb,’ she must have privileges equal to those of Jesus—including his heavenly ascension.

Language scholars say that the expression “full of grace” is an imprecise translation and that the original Greek expression used by Luke is more accurately rendered “object of the favor of God.” The Catholic Jerusalem Bible thus renders Luke 1:28: “Rejoice, so highly favoured!” There is no reason to conclude that Mary was sinless or assumed bodily into heaven just because she was “highly favored” by God.

The first Christian martyr, Stephen, was likewise spoken of in the Catholic Douay Bible as being highly favored, or “full of grace”—and no SINLESS bodily resurrection has been ascribed to him.—Acts 6:8.

Yet, was not Mary blessed or favored? Yes, but interestingly, the woman named Jael back in the days of Israel’s judges was considered to be “blessed among women.” (Judges 5:24, Dy) Certainly no one would argue that Jael too was taken sinless or bodily into heaven. Besides, the whole idea of the Assumption is based on the premise that Jesus himself ascended to heaven in the flesh. However, the Bible says that Jesus was “enlivened,” or resurrected, “in the spirit.” (1Peter 3:18, Dy; compare 1Corinthians 15:45.) The apostle Paul further says that “flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God.”—1*Corinthians 15:42-50, Dy.

Gotta run

Some render the verse, “Hail, highly favored one.” What is the definition of grace? What IS grace? It is God’s favor, so Mary being called full of grace means the same thing.

Jesus was redeeming the Adamic sin, no? So who plays the role of Eve? Eve said no to God when she disobeyed Him in the garden of Eden and brought death to us all, but Mary said yes to God and gave birth to the one who would bring eternal life for us all. So just as Adam and Eve brought death unto themselves, and us all, when they ate of the tree of life, Jesus brought us life from the “tree” of death, the cross, with Mary, His mother and the first to accept Christ and becoming our spiritual mother, at the foot of the cross.

God instituted the family arrangement, which includes a woman, a mother. Like the queen mother in Solomons time who interceeded for others with her son, Mary can pray for us, just as you, me, Vasian and whoever else can pray for each other. “Dave, I’m not doing too well these days, could you say a prayer for me?” Same thing. Wasn’t Mary there at Penetcost? So we can at least agree that she is in heaven and just like we can pray for each other, Mary and others in heaven can pray for us.

Mary is also the new ark of the covenant. Christ, like the Ten Commandments, was the Word of God (John 1) in flesh. This is why Elizabeth quotes almost verbatim 2 Samuel 6:9 (David feared the LORD that day and said, “How can the ark of the LORD come to me?” ) when she cries aloud “And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”-Luke 1:43. So, just as the ark carried the Word of God, the 10 commandments, representing the Old Covenant, Mary carried the Word in flesh in her womb representing the New covenant.

In Revelation 11, John describes seeing a Temple in heaven, and what is this temple? Did not Christ desribe Himself as a Temple when He said He would make His body rise again in John 2:13-25? John also saw an ark in Rev. 11. So what was the ark? Revelation 12 goes on to describe her. Remember, the Church or congregation did not give birth to Christ, so the male child described could only mean Christ and who gives birth to him could only mean Mary.

Dave, I’m curious. If Christ promised his Church or congregation in Matt. 16 would not have the gates of hell/hades prevail against it, where did it go?

Peace be with you

 

[JeanneH]

[sign]
oneGODoneCHURCH;reguarding Mary:

Hail, full of grace

, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. 29 Who having heard, was troubled at his saying, and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be. 30 And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God.

Full of grace is another way of saying without sin.

[/sign]
oneGODoneCHURCH;reguarding Mary:

OKAY, real quick… the Onan thing was covered in my earlyier posts.

regarding Mary: you all need to read our articles about that wonderful woman!

Pope Pius XII claimed that the Assumption dogma has “its ultimate foundation in the Holy Scripture.” Among the texts often cited as proof of Mary’s sinless assumption is Luke 1:28,42. These verses say of Mary: “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women ..., and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.” (Douay) The assumptionists reason that because Mary was “full of grace,” she must never have been overcome by death. And being “blessed” like the ‘fruit of her womb,’ she must have privileges equal to those of Jesus—including his heavenly ascension.

Language scholars say that the expression “full of grace” is an imprecise translation and that the original Greek expression used by Luke is more accurately rendered “object of the favor of God.” The Catholic Jerusalem Bible thus renders Luke 1:28: “Rejoice, so highly favoured!” There is no reason to conclude that Mary was sinless or assumed bodily into heaven just because she was “highly favored” by God.

The first Christian martyr, Stephen, was likewise spoken of in the Catholic Douay Bible as being highly favored, or “full of grace”—and no SINLESS bodily resurrection has been ascribed to him.—Acts 6:8.

Yet, was not Mary blessed or favored? Yes, but interestingly, the woman named Jael back in the days of Israel’s judges was considered to be “blessed among women.” (Judges 5:24, Dy) Certainly no one would argue that Jael too was taken sinless or bodily into heaven. Besides, the whole idea of the Assumption is based on the premise that Jesus himself ascended to heaven in the flesh. However, the Bible says that Jesus was “enlivened,” or resurrected, “in the spirit.” (1Peter 3:18, Dy; compare 1Corinthians 15:45.) The apostle Paul further says that “flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God.”—1*Corinthians 15:42-50, Dy.

Gotta run

Do you think that God would choose a woman who had sin on her soul to be the mother of God/Jesus? I don’t.
Just a thought.
Jeanne

 

[Cristian_B]

dj dave;6502877:

Jesus was redeeming the Adamic sin, no? So who plays the role of Eve? Eve said no to God when she disobeyed Him in the garden of Eden and brought death to us all, but Mary said yes to God and gave birth to the one who would bring eternal life for us all. So just as Adam and Eve brought death unto themselves, and us all, when they ate of the tree of life, Jesus brought us life from the “tree” of death, the cross, with Mary, His mother and the first to accept Christ and becoming our spiritual mother, at the foot of the cross.

The Church is the new Eve and not Adam.

Eve was the wife of Adam. Christ is the new Adam. Who is the wife of Christ, the second Eve? If you read you bible you’ll see that it says that the Church is God’s wife/spouse.

The second Eve is the Church, not Mary.

 

[Cristian_B]

dj dave;6502877:

Do you think that God would choose a woman who had sin on her soul to be the mother of God/Jesus? I don’t.
Just a thought.
Jeanne

If He wouldn’t have then Jesus wouldn’t have been our brother.

 

[PRmerger]

JeanneH;6504989:

If He wouldn’t have then Jesus wouldn’t have been our brother.

What verses in Scripture are you basing this on, Cristian?

 

[dj_dave]

[SIGN]T More;

In Revelation 11, John describes seeing a Temple in heaven, and what is this temple? Did not Christ desribe Himself as a Temple when He said He would make His body rise again in John 2:13-25? John also saw an ark in Rev. 11. So what was the ark? Revelation 12 goes on to describe her. Remember, the Church or congregation did not give birth to Christ, so the male child described could only mean Christ and who gives birth to him could only mean Mary. [/SIGN]

THIS IS WHAT WE BELIVE:

*** re chap. 27 pp. 177-178 pars. 2-6 God’s Kingdom Is Born! ***
—Revelation 12:1, 2.
3 For the first time, John beholds a woman in heaven. She is, of course, not a literal woman. Rather, she is a sign, or a symbol. (Revelation 1:1) What does she symbolize? In the inspired prophecies, women at times represent organizations “married” to outstanding personalities. In the Hebrew Scriptures, Israel was spoken of as a wife of Jehovah God. (Jeremiah 3:14) In the Greek Scriptures, the congregation of anointed Christians is spoken of as Christ’s bride. (Revelation 21:9-14)

The woman John here sees is also married to someone, and she is about to give birth. Who is her husband? Well, later her child is “caught away to God and to his throne.” (Revelation 12:5) Jehovah thus claims the child as his own. Therefore, the woman that John sees must be Jehovah’s symbolic wife.

4 About eight centuries earlier, Jehovah had addressed this symbolic wife, saying: “All your sons will be persons taught by Jehovah.” (Isaiah 54:5, 13) Jesus quoted this prophecy and showed that these sons were his faithful followers, who later formed the congregation of anointed Christians. (John 6:44, 45) So members of this congregation, spoken of as God’s sons, are also children of God’s symbolic wife. (Romans 8:14) The apostle Paul adds the final piece of information when he says: “The Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.” (Galatians 4:26) The “woman” seen by John, then, is “the Jerusalem above.”

5 Exactly what, though, is Jerusalem above? Since Paul spoke of her as “above,” and John sees her in heaven, she is clearly not an earthly city; neither is she the same as “New Jerusalem,” since that organization is the bride of Christ, not Jehovah’s wife. (Revelation 21:2) Notice that she is crowned with 12 stars. The number 12 is associated with completeness in an organizational setting. (Compare the 12 tribes of fleshly Israel, the 12 apostles, the 12 tribes of spiritual Israel, and the 12 gates, 12 angels, and 12 foundation stones of the New Jerusalem.—Revelation 21:12-14)
.
Hence, these 12 stars seem to indicate that she is an organizational arrangement in heaven, just as ancient Jerusalem was on earth. Jerusalem above is Jehovah’s universal organization of spirit creatures that acts as his wife, both in serving him and in producing offspring.

6 John sees this woman as being robed with the sun and having the moon beneath her feet. When we add her crown of stars, she is completely surrounded by heavenly lights. God’s favor shines upon her day and night. What a fitting symbol of Jehovah’s magnificent heavenly organization! She is also pregnant, enduring labor pains. (iF THIS WAS MARY AND MARY WAS SINNLESS WOULD SHE BE HAVING SUCH AGONIZING LABOR PAINS?-compare Gen 3:16)) Her cries for divine help show that her time has come to give birth. In the Bible, labor pains often symbolize the hard work needed to produce an important result. (Compare Psalm 90:2; Proverbs 25:23; Isaiah 66:7, 8.) No doubt labor pains of this kind were experienced as Jehovah’s heavenly organization prepared for this historic birth.

Rev 1:10 the Lord’s Day is not a Saturday or Sunday… what is the Lord’s day? The apostle Paul refers to it as a time of judgment and of fulfillment of divine promises. (1Corinthians 1:8; 2Corinthians 1:14; Philippians 1:6, 10; 2:16) With the arrival of that “day,” Jehovah’s grand purposes move progressively and triumphantly toward their climax. That “day” begins with the crowning of Jesus as heavenly King. (Fulfillment of Ps 110:1) Even after Jesus executes judgment on Satan’s world, the Lord’s day continues, with the restoration of Paradise and the perfecting of mankind, until Jesus finally “hands over the kingdom to his God and Father.”—1Corinthians 15:24-26; Revelation 6:1,2.

ALSO (Acts 17:31) 31Because he has set a day in which he purposes to judge the inhabited earth in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and he has furnished a guarantee to all men in that he has resurrected him from the dead.”

…that is just what we belive the Bible teaches, I know is is far different from your beliefs.

 

[PRmerger]

She is also pregnant, enduring labor pains. (iF THIS WAS MARY AND MARY WAS SINNLESS WOULD SHE BE HAVING SUCH AGONIZING LABOR PAINS?

What a peculiar thing to say, in light of another person person enduring an agonizing, torturous death, WHO ALSO WAS SINLESS.

Are you really saying, dave, that if someone has endures pain and suffering that he/she must therefore have committed a sin?

 

[PRmerger]

If He wouldn’t have then Jesus wouldn’t have been our brother.

What verses in Scripture are you basing this on, Cristian?

 

[JeanneH]

What verses in Scripture are you basing this on, Cristian?

What about Luke 1:28 —Hail, full of Grace----
What about OT typology. Mary is the new ark. The OT ark was made from the purest gold inside and outside. Purest gold would have no blemish in or on it so therefore Mary would have been born with no blemishes.
Just my thoughts.
Jeanne

 

[Vasian]

[SIGN]T More;

THIS IS WHAT WE BELIVE:

At least your long cut n pastes from the WTS are free of misspelled words…

It is spelled, “believe”

Now, if you could just start actually researching and proving true or false what you cut n paste, you actually could boast of seeking and obtaining accurate knowledge, rather than boasting on all of the cut n pastes you do around here… Cut n pastes that you obviously do not clearly and completely understand.

 

[PRmerger]

What about Luke 1:28 —Hail, full of Grace----
What about OT typology. Mary is the new ark. The OT ark was made from the purest gold inside and outside. Purest gold would have no blemish in or on it so therefore Mary would have been born with no blemishes.
Just my thoughts.
Jeanne

Jeanne, my question was addressed to Cristian.

I want to know why he believes Mary needed to have sin in order for Jesus to be our brother. What verses in Scripture tell him this?

 

[JeanneH]

Jeanne, my question was addressed to Cristian.

I want to know why he believes Mary needed to have sin in order for Jesus to be our brother. What verses in Scripture tell him this?

Sorry

He will be hard pressed to fine one.

Jeanne