JW at the door: Where the Hispanics at?

[StrawberryJam]

Oh, if this thread is really about challenging the beliefs of JW’s, I am more than willing to ask and challenge them. But, I am trying to stay within the bounds of the thread topic. Therefore I can not. But, would be happy to challenge any of the sincere JW’s about their beliefs now that I have had some time to study it at a distance.

 

[campeador]

The Truth is Jesus is not God nor divine.

My friend, I posted a link to several bible verses that refute your claim—

Required by Jesus.

 

[StrawberryJam]

If Jesus is not God, that raises many questions. Such as, why are those who believe that not Jews? Or Muslims?

Divinity is stripped from Jesus after reading the NT?

How?

What sacrifice happened then? If it was not a perfect sacrifice, an unblemished sacrifice- then no one has hope but the Jews.

 

[Sufjon]

Indeed.

What causes divisions are divisions in Truth.

Thus, either it is true that the Eucharist is the body/blood/soul and divinity of our Savior, or it is not, and it is then idolatry what Catholics do.

And, either Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life, or there are other ways. Both cannot be true.

Hi PRMMerger: I have already been over the Eucharist with you on another thread. I don’t know if you recall that I have no disagreement with it. That is an easy concept for me to understand and accept. It fits well with what I believe.

As for the Way, the Truth and the Life, yes I think all Christians would agree with that. As for the other ways you mention, there seem to be many ways among Christians. That is what I am trying to sort out.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[PRmerger]

Hi PRMMerger: I have already been over the Eucharist with you on another thread. I don’t know if you recall that I have no disagreement with it. That is an easy concept for me to understand and accept. It fits well with what I believe.

Excellent.

However, my comment regarding the Eucharist was not meant specifically as a point of contention between us, (and yes, I do indeed remember going over this with you on another thread! ) but as a point of contention between many Christian denominations. They find what Catholics (and Orthodox) believe to be an abomination.

Thus, either it’s true or it’s something horrific.

*That’s *the source of division.

As for the Way, the Truth and the Life, yes I think all Christians would agree with that. As for the other ways you mention, there seem to be many ways among Christians. That is what I am trying to sort out.

But there is only 1 Truth.

Either baptism now saves you, or it doesn’t. Both can’t be correct. That’s the source of division among Christians. It’s not “many ways”. One or the other.

Either divorce and re-marriage is adultery, or it’s permissible. Both can’t be correct. That’s another source of division. In fact, many Catholics leave the CC because of this teaching of Jesus that they refuse to accept. :sad_yes:

 

[jw2lds2catholic]

All four gospels picked by a council in 4th century by a group of people, are no more than books of biographies in which their unknown authors quoted some words of Jesus out of what they heard from other uknown people. They were not the eyewitnesses of any actual happening/Jesus life. None of these are inspired by God, as they are contradictory.

This is why JWs don’t post on the internet. I recall spending every Thursday night at the Kingdom Hall working through the book “All Scripture is Inspired” that said otherwise. Either a LOT has changed since 1992 (when I disassociated) or this person is speaking out of turn. Your Bible studies must be interesting–any of them publishers?

Link to the org: watchtower.org/e/jt/index.htm

“From this it is apparent that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe in the Bible as the Word of God. They consider its 66 books to be inspired and historically accurate. What is commonly called the New Testament they refer to as the Christian Greek Scriptures, and the Old Testament they call the Hebrew Scriptures. They rely on both of these, the Greek and the Hebrew Scriptures, and take them literally except where the expressions or settings obviously indicate that they are figurative or symbolic. They understand that many of the prophecies of the Bible have been fulfilled, others are in the course of fulfillment, and still others await fulfillment.”

 

[rainman10]

No, they are preying on anybody. They probably were given some Spanish material and they were trying to deposit them in the right households.

I was told that they purchase these materials from the church with their own money and then distribute to the public. And any donations they get from handing out their literature, they give it to their church. Is this correct?

 

[pablope]

Here is good link to a past article on The Rock about JW and how to derail their pre-programmed dialogue:

catholic.com/thisrock/1996/9612fea2.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9706fea1.asp

From the Rock Magazine:

Q: I recently tried to prove Jesus’ divinity to a Jehovah’s Witness, and when I asked him to turn to John 1:1 in his Bible as one proof text, his version read “the Word was a god.” How should I have responded to him? My Bible says in this verse that the “Word was God”?

A: Unless you want to get into an in-depth study of biblical Greek, there is another approach that can be used to demonstrate the inaccuracy of how John 1:1 is rendered in the New World Translation, the Jehovah’s Witness’ Bible.

Have the Witness read Isaiah 43:10 and Isaiah 44:6 from his Bible. Then ask him how many Gods there are who are true God by nature. The Witness will respond by saying there is only one true God. Since the Bible says there is only one true God by nature, ask the Witness if he agrees that all other so-called “gods” must be, by definition, false gods. You will get an affirmative response. Suggest that in light of these considerations we can use the phrase “true God” in the Bible whenever it speaks of the Creator and “false god” whenever it speaks of any other alleged “god.” Then turn to the opening verses of John’s Gospel. Ask the Witness if Jesus is “true God.”

He will respond in the negative. Then, using the premise you just established, read verses 1–14, but substitute the term “false god” each time “Word” appears in the text. The result will sound absurd. Read these verses again, but this time substitute “true God” instead. Ask the Witness which version makes theological sense (obviously the latter), and end by stating that the only logical conclusion that can be drawn is that Jesus is indeed true God and that therefore the New World Translation’s rendering of John 1:1 cannot be accurate.

Joel S. Peters

 

[4Squarebaby]

The Latino households in the community I worked in often had a sign identifying them as a Catholic household. I often wondered if the door to door evangelist took those signs as a legal no soliciting notice or as a beacon like a mezuzah case on Jewish homes or houses once owned by Jews?

 

[Nicea325]

I had an interesting encounter with JWs just 10 minutes ago. After having a laugh with my husband (who isn’t home) I decided to share this y’all.

The door bell rings and two gentleman dressed in suits are there. First thing the younger one said was “Ma’am, do you know of any hispanic families in the neighborhood?”

Startled, I said “Uh, no”. In my head I was thinking: I know exactly who you are. I could recognized that standard sized gilded “bible” anywhere so why would I tell you who my 'hispanic" neighbors are so you can try and convert them to a religion I wouldn’t recommend to my passed mother. Lastly, how rude can you be!? No introduction in terms of who or what you are.

So feeling a little snarky I then said “What you don’t speak English?”

To which the same man replied with a laugh, Of course, it’s just that we only have spanish literature so it would be hard to translate." He then opened his satchel revealing a stack of “Watchtower” and “Awake” magazines all in spanish. “If I had Engllsh ones I would share them with you.”. Then he made a kind comment about my dog.

After a few words, I asked “Are you Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons” Of course, I knew the answer. He replied “Jehovah’s Witnesses.” And with that they wished me a good day and moved on.

I had been a JW for severals years in my youth and this is was the craziest line-opener yet. I don’t think this is the approach they recommend at the Theocractic Ministry School. DIdn’t even bother to share ANY message with me but wanted me to rat out my spanish-speaking neighbors so they dump their propoganda on them. Hilarious! And btw - never did get their names…

JW’s love to hunt on the meek and ignorant. I am of Hispanic decent,but I am educated and when they try pulling their baloney I let them have it…

 

[Nicea325]

The Truth is Jesus is not God nor divine.

According to JW’s truth,which really means nothing to God and His TRUTH.

If Jesus is NOT God,then explain to me how a mere creature (Jesus) managed to redeem humanity and eventually save humanity? I thought only God can save?

Creatures cannot save nor be worshiped…it is against God.

 

[Sufjon]

Excellent.

But there is only 1 Truth.

Either baptism now saves you, or it doesn’t. Both can’t be correct. That’s the source of division among Christians. It’s not “many ways”. One or the other.

I Learned something new again. I thought by and large most Christians believed in baptism. I also knew that Jesus was baptized, but I was unaware that it was booked by Jesus as a prerequisite for salvation. Even though I just learned something, I now have two more questions (as usual) if you would be so kind:

-Did Jesus say that baptism was required for salvation, and

-Which Christians don’t believe in baptism?

Either divorce and re-marriage is adultery, or it’s permissible. Both can’t be correct. That’s another source of division. In fact, many Catholics leave the CC because of this teaching of Jesus that they refuse to accept. :sad_yes:

I knew about that difference between Catholics and other Christians. I do have a question though. Was that a Jesus teaching about not being able to get divorced, or is that a Church tradition? Did Jesus say not to get divorced?

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[jmcrae]

Hi (name removed by moderator): Some Jehovah’s Witnesses came to my door a few times and they talked about Jesus, so I took it that they were Christians, so now I am even more confused than before. Aren’t followers of Jesus Christians? Anyway, I invited them in for coffee and they stayed for quite a while. I enjoyed their visit. They never mentioned their dislike for the Catholic Church to me. To the best of my recollection they never mentioned the Catholic Church in any regard.

Anyway, this is part of my general confusion regarding Christianity - the divisions among Christians. I am learning more about it. Today I have learned that Christians don’t always consider other followers of Jesus to be Christians. I am both puzzled and troubled by this as I try to incorporate Christian beliefs into my own life. I wonder if I will ever be able to do this. Well, that’s my problem and not yours I suppose.

Thanks again for the clarification.

Your friend,
Sufjon

The Nicene Creed is the generally accepted standard for what Christians believe. Simply saying the word “Jesus” doesn’t make you a Christian, if you don’t believe that He was born of the Virgin Mary, or that He is one in being with the Father - which the Jehovah’s Witnesses do not.

 

[jmcrae]

I Learned something new again. I thought by and large most Christians believed in baptism. I also knew that Jesus was baptized, but I was unaware that it was booked by Jesus as a prerequisite for salvation. Even though I just learned something, I now have two more questions (as usual) if you would be so kind:

-Did Jesus say that baptism was required for salvation

Matthew 28:16-20 - Jesus commands the Disciples to baptize and convert everyone in the whole world. Logically, if the Disciples are required to baptize us, it means that we are required to be baptized by them (or, today, their successors).

I knew about that difference between Catholics and other Christians. I do have a question though. Was that a Jesus teaching about not being able to get divorced, or is that a Church tradition? Did Jesus say not to get divorced?

Yes. Read through Matthew 19:1-12 - it’s very clear that Jesus is opposed to divorce,and considers it a prelude to adultery.

 

[Sufjon]

Matthew 28:16-20 -

Yes. Read through Matthew 19:1-12 - it’s very clear that Jesus is opposed to divorce,and considers it a prelude to adultery.

Thank you jmcrae:

More confusion for me. I looked up the international version of that and it says:

Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.
9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

If have some follow on questions if I may:

Question: Except for sexual immorality?

New American Bible version:

I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery."

Question: What makes a marriage unlawful?

Question: Who added the part in parentheses?

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[jmcrae]

Thank you jmcrae:

More confusion for me. I looked up the international version of that and it says:

Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.
9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

If have some follow on questions if I may:

Question: Except for sexual immorality?

If the marriage was not originally valid - for example, if siblings had attempted to marry, this would be sexual immorality, and they would not only be permitted to divorce, it would be required of them to divorce.

New American Bible version:

I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery."

Question: What makes a marriage unlawful?

A marriage is unlawful if one or both of the parties is already married to someone else; if the parties are siblings or other close kin; if one or both of the parties are under-age; if the parties are of the same sex; if the requirements of the law were not met with regard to the wedding - for example, no witnesses, or the presider was not authorized to officially witness the wedding - just to name a few examples. You can probably think of others.

Question: Who added the part in parentheses?

I assume the original writer of the Gospel, which I again assume was the Apostle Matthew or his scribe.

 

[PRmerger]

-Which Christians don’t believe in baptism?

There are thousands and thousands of Christian denominations, Sufjon, each claiming their own interpretation of 1 Pet 3:21. (Here’s just one example) So to say which ones don’t believe in baptism would be impossible.

Some claim it is an ordinance.

Some say it just gets you wet.

Some say you must be immersed in a river.

Some say you can be “sprinkled”.

Some say you must wait until you’re an adult.

Some say…

 

[Sufjon]

There are thousands and thousands of Christian denominations, Sufjon, each claiming their own interpretation of 1 Pet 3:21. (Here’s just one example) So to say which ones don’t believe in baptism would be impossible.

Some claim it is an ordinance.

Some say it just gets you wet.

Some say you must be immersed in a river.

Some say you can be “sprinkled”.

Some say you must wait until you’re an adult.

Some say…

Thanks PRMerger: I think trying to get my head around all the permutations of Christianity is a bit like shoveling smoke with a pitchfork. I’ll just wear myself out

 

[Sufjon]

If the marriage was not originally valid - for example, if siblings had attempted to marry, this would be sexual immorality, and they would not only be permitted to divorce, it would be required of them to divorce.

A marriage is unlawful if one or both of the parties is already married to someone else; if the parties are siblings or other close kin; if one or both of the parties are under-age; if the parties are of the same sex; if the requirements of the law were not met with regard to the wedding - for example, no witnesses, or the presider was not authorized to officially witness the wedding - just to name a few examples. You can probably think of others.

I assume the original writer of the Gospel, which I again assume was the Apostle Matthew or his scribe.

Thank you for your patience and your help jmcrae. It all sounds a bit legalistic to me, but much of what I am running into in my forays into the world of Christianity is that way. Well, that is why I am here - to learn.

Thanks again!

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[rbrownr]

According to JW’s truth,which really means nothing to God and His TRUTH.

If Jesus is NOT God,then explain to me how a mere creature (Jesus) managed to redeem humanity and eventually save humanity? I thought only God can save?

Creatures cannot save nor be worshiped…it is against God.

All you need is follow law/doctrine of God-OT. No need to believe in Divinity of Jesus which does’nt exist.

Only Father God of me, you, all and Jesus ] is Divine. Which is in Trinity, placed always in the first person. The other two persons are His creatures…not Divine. By the way Father is not a person.

Jesus answered them, and said: My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. [17] If any man do the will of him; he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. [18] He that speaketh of himself, seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh the glory of him that sent him, he is true, and there is no injustice in him. [19] Did Moses not give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? [20] Why seek you to kill me? The multitude answered, and said: Thou hast a devil; who seeketh to kill thee?