Jehova's Witness

[Brendan]

With all due respect to St. Paul, I have to give precedence to our Holy Teacher’s instruction given in Matthew 5:23.
In regard to the meaning of the word “Renegade,” my Jerusalem Bible notes that "Apostasy was the most repulsive of all sins."

How does Matthew 5:23 contradict St Paul. There seems to be no contradiction ( nor can their be, as both are the Teachings of God, one from the Son of God, the other inspired by the Spirit of God, The Paraclete)

In regards to the use of “Renegade” in the Bible, are you referring to the Greek μετατίθεσθε\metatithesthe. Or the Hebrew שׁוֹבֵבָה\shobeb? Or which specific verse?

 

[Brendan]

**OK. Let me put it this way: The act of building and deploying a weapons system that is capable of killing every human being on the face of the earth was and continues to be morally wrong, evil in the worst way.
But most Christians have never been prohibited by their Churches form engaging in that evil activity. In that respect, at least, the JWs are better than the rest of us. **

First of all , you used the term ‘act’. Who is doing the act, a person, or the device being built.

Secondly, you didn’t answer the question I posed.

I restate: In the example that I gave, that of diverting an asteroid using a nuclear device, where is the moral wrong. What part of that would be offensive to God?

 

[jeffrey_erwin]

First of all , you used the term ‘act’. Who is doing the act, a person, or the device being built.
Secondly, you didn’t answer the question I posed.
I restate: In the example that I gave, that of diverting an asteroid using a nuclear device, where is the moral wrong. What part of that would be offensive to God?

I am not answering your question because I find it to be an irrelevant deflection of the issue.

Furthermore and with all due respect, sir, I think that you are using clever semantics to avoid admitting the obvious: That good Christian people have engaged in an morally wrong and evil act. That act being the building and deployment of the above mentioned weapon systems.

 

[jeffrey_erwin]

How does Matthew 5:23 contradict St Paul. There seems to be no contradiction ( nor can their be, as both are the Teachings of God, one from the Son of God, the other inspired by the Spirit of God, The Paraclete)

In regards to the use of “Renegade” in the Bible, are you referring to the Greek μετατίθεσθε\metatithesthe. Or the Hebrew שׁוֹבֵבָה\shobeb? Or which specific verse?

**I have to type this passage out for you?

“…and if a man calls him ‘Renegade’ he will answer for it in hell fire.” Matthew 5:22-23

**

 

[Micosil]

Catholics, Jews, and Anglicans have built and stand ready to deploy a weapons system that has the potential to cause the extinction of the human race.
If one wants to call this system “morally neutral,” then I must respectfully disagree. It’s an evil system that has no place in a Christian society.
Its very existence is offensive to our Creator, who will create the necessary circumstances to cause us to actually use these horrible weapons.

The nations have sunk into a pit of their own making,
they are caught by the feet in the snare they set themselves.
YHWH has . . .trapped the wicked in the work of their own hands.

You’re saying that as if these religious faith systems officially condone and recommend the fabrication and deployment of weapons of mass destruction. That is not the case at all.

**I never said that abortion wasn’t an evil thing, but, evil as it is, such does not threaten to wipe out the human race. As for a JW building a WMD, that’s just silly.
They are forbidden to volunteer for any duty that would involve the death or injury of another human being.

And for “seeing the future,” I believe in our Holy Scriptures which, to me at least, clearly indicate our coming global nuclear war. See;

Psalm 9:15-16 (above)

Isaiah 2;10,18,21:
Go into the hollows of the rocks,
into the caverns of the earth,
at the sight of the terror of YHWH,
at the brilliance of His majesty . …**

Isaiah 66:15-16
and
Jeremiah 25:32-33 (below)

Oh, it doesn’t threaten to wipe out the human race? Note that the predicted crude death rate is only increasing, and the crude predicted birth rate is only decreasing. Do you think abortion helps with that?

With all due respect to St. Paul, I have to give precedence to our Holy Teacher’s instruction given in Matthew 5:23.
In regard to the meaning of the word “Renegade,” my Jerusalem Bible notes that "Apostasy was the most repulsive of all sins."

Before you said “Renegade” implied “Heretic”. Apostasy is the wholesale rejection of Christianity, not just getting some doctrines wrong.

 

[Brendan]

**I have to type this passage out for you?

“…and if a man calls him ‘Renegade’ he will answer for it in hell fire.” Matthew 5:22-23

**

Your translation is faulty. The word St. Matthew is μωρός\moros meaning foolish (where we get the word ‘moron’).

The Greek word for heretic is μετατίθεσθε\metatithesthe

So your statement that "I would never call another religion a “heresy” because I think that this goes against our Teacher’s admonition to refrain from calling anyone a “renegade” (which meant a heretic.) " does not follow from the citation that you gave. The admonition that Christ gave does not apply here.

I am not answering your question because I find it to be an irrelevant deflection of the issue.

You were the one who brought up the topic of nuclear devices, and later claimed that the devices were evil in and of themselves. If you felt that that such discussion was irrelevant, why did you bring it up?

 

[jeffrey_erwin]

You’re saying that as if these religious faith systems officially condone and recommend the fabrication and deployment of weapons of mass destruction. That is not the case at all.
It is the case. I’ve brought up the idea of Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament on a thread. I got no agreement with that Idea, just vehement resistance.
Oh, it doesn’t threaten to wipe out the human race? Note that the predicted crude death rate is only increasing, and the crude predicted birth rate is only decreasing. Do you think abortion helps with that?
The idea that abortion is going to cause the human race to go extinct is just silly.

Before you said “Renegade” implied “Heretic”. Apostasy is the wholesale rejection of Christianity, not just getting some doctrines wrong.

My apologies for using an incorrect term.

 

[adamhovey1988]

Okay, so reading the comments, this went off-topic very quickly. Regarding the OP, what kind of sources are you looking for?

 

[Micosil]

Okay, so reading the comments, this went off-topic very quickly. Regarding the OP, what kind of sources are you looking for?

My understanding is that the OP was looking for the links similar to the four I pasted in the second message of the thread. Cyril didn’t comment on them though.

 

[jeffrey_erwin]

But I say this to you: anyone who is angry with his brother will answer for it before the court; if a man calls his brother “Fool” he will answer for it before the Sanhedrin;
and if a man calls him “Renegade” he will answer for it in hell fire.*

*To the first meaning (“fool”) of the Greek word, Jewish usage added the much more insulting one of “impious”.

From THE JERUSALEM BIBLE
footnote included.

 

[adamhovey1988]

My understanding is that the OP was looking for the links similar to the four I pasted in the second message of the thread. Cyril didn’t comment on them though.

They are very good links too. I was wondering what specific area the OP was looking for. JWs are not uncommon where I live. Which, come to think of it, is a little amazing, since I live in a pretty solidly Protestant area. I’m not sure why this thread become, you know, a battleground.

 

[jeffrey_erwin]

**I think that someone objected to having his JW friends referred to as heretics, and pointed out that, since no JW would build a nuclear weapon, they were, in at least one respect, better than us Anglicans and Catholics.

Others then strongly contested this viewpoint.**

 

[Brendan]

But I say this to you: anyone who is angry with his brother will answer for it before the court; if a man calls his brother “Fool” he will answer for it before the Sanhedrin;
and if a man calls him “Renegade” he will answer for it in hell fire.*

*To the first meaning (“fool”) of the Greek word, Jewish usage added the much more insulting one of “impious”.

From THE JERUSALEM BIBLE
footnote included.

Here is Darby’s Literal Translation

But I say unto you, that every one that is lightly angry with his brother shall be subject to the judgment; but whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be subject to [be called before] the sanhedrim; but whosoever shall say, Fool, shall be subject to the penalty of the hell of fire.

Raca is an Aramaic term of contempt, meaning ‘empty head’

And the word for fool listed is Greek moros, that I provided previous. So, as I stated, if your version translated ‘moros’ as ‘renegade’, it is in error, and it certainly does not mean the same as ‘heretic’

As to your reference of "jewish usage’ that would be the Holy Spirit in Psalm 14:1

The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds,
there is none who does good.

So it would not be the Jews who claim that נָבָל
arath implies impiosness, that would the Word of God that makes the claim.

 

[jeffrey_erwin]

THE JERUSALEM BIBLE is a Catholic translation, and I stand by it. If you have differences, please take that up with its editors.

 

[Sensy86]

Read the early church fathers writings to them I use Patrick Madrid book Why is it in Tradition it has the earliest writings about the trinity of the early church fathers. If they don’t know who are the early church fathers tell them go to there online library in jw.org its there.

I print this and give this to them
wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200000880?q=early+church+fathers&p=par
then I read the early church writings.

I hope this help. God bless.

 

[Cyril_Of_Canada]

Okay, so reading the comments, this went off-topic very quickly. Regarding the OP, what kind of sources are you looking for?

Thank you.
I’m going by the same as here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13705611&postcount=2

I was hoping for a play-by-play break down on why this exactly this magazine wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102013286 of theirs is in error. Something that addresses their points. Zeigeist movie 1 makes similar accusations as well.

 

[adamhovey1988]

Thank you.
I’m going by the same as here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13705611&postcount=2

I was hoping for a play-by-play break down on why this exactly this magazine wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102013286 of theirs is in error. Something that addresses their points. Zeigeist movie 1 makes similar accusations as well.

I always found the people that believe in the in-errancy of zeitgeist a little odd. I remember talking to a non-believer about how watching an hour of zeitgeist doesn’t make you an expert in comparative religion. I can tell you that quoting Gerald Massey is not a good idea if you want to have an actual intellectual debate. I am not sure if I can do a point by point at the moment (I have a test at 6 pm, so I kind of need to study) but hopefully, one of your wonderful fellow Christians on this forum can help you.

 

[Cyril_Of_Canada]

I always found the people that believe in the in-errancy of zeitgeist a little odd. I remember talking to a non-believer about how watching an hour of zeitgeist doesn’t make you an expert in comparative religion. I can tell you that quoting Gerald Massey is not a good idea if you want to have an actual intellectual debate. I am not sure if I can do a point by point at the moment (I have a test at 6 pm, so I kind of need to study) but hopefully, one of your wonderful fellow Christians on this forum can help you.

We should make an attempt with the whole Catholic Answers community as a community effort. Sounds good?

 

[Micosil]

Thank you.
I’m going by the same as here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13705611&postcount=2

I was hoping for a play-by-play break down on why this exactly this magazine wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102013286 of theirs is in error. Something that addresses their points. Zeigeist movie 1 makes similar accusations as well.

I am glad you found my links useful.

I’ve glanced at that JW apologetics page, and it commits blunder after blunder. Behind it all, the main problem I see is a very flawed understanding of how doctrine develops.

What you basically need to address is how both Jesus Christ (the Son) and the Holy Spirit are God (as JW’s seem to accept that the Father is God).

The Divinity of Christ

The Divinity of the Holy Spirit

 

[jeffrey_erwin]

Thank you.
I’m going by the same as here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13705611&postcount=2
I was hoping for a play-by-play break down on why this exactly this magazine wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102013286 of theirs is in error. Something that addresses their points. Zeigeist movie 1 makes similar accusations as well.

I see that the JW pamphlet is about the concept of the Trinity.
In Judaism we do not find the concept of a either a duality or a trinity in their understanding of our Creator even though the “Spirit” is noted as possessing a personality.

**Then the Spirit came forward and stood before YHWH, “I,” He said, “I will trick him.” “How?” YHWH asked. He replied, “I will go and become a lying Spirit in the mouths of all of his prophets.” **

**Nonetheless we must remember that Rabbi Yeshu endowed His disciples with the right to make whatever theological changes that they wished. Therefore we accept the Catholic concept of the Trinity.
However, if some other disciples of our Lord decide to take a different viewpoint, we should not label them as “heretics,” but rather keep in mind that they might be following the Jewish understanding of our Creator. **