JW's - Proving to JW's that Jesus is God

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh, we should mention the FACT that not one of the people listed below ever believed that Jesus is the Archangel Michael either (except for Russell). Sabellius, by the way, DID believe that Jesus was Almighty God. His ERROR was that he believed that Jesus was God the FATHER and that the FATHER incarnated and died on the Cross as the son (temporarily) named Jesus. Sabellius’s error is called MODALISM.

Natalius [2], ~200
Sabellius, ~220
Paul of Samosata, 269
Arius, 336
Eusebius of Nicomedia, 341, baptized Constantine
Constantius II, Byzantine Emperor, 361
Antipope Felix II, 365
Aëtius, 367
Ulfilas, Apostle to the Goths, 383
Priscillian, 385, considered first Christian to be executed for heresy
Muhammad, 632, see also Isa
Ludwig Haetzer, 1529
Juan de Valdés, 1541
Michael Servetus, 1553, burned at the stake in Geneva under John Calvin
Sebastian Castellio, 1563
Ferenc Dávid, 1579
Fausto Paolo Sozzini, 1604
John Biddle, 1662
Thomas Aikenhead, 1697, last person to be hanged for blasphemy in Britain
John Locke, 1704
Isaac Newton, 1727
William Whiston, 1752, expelled from University of Cambridge in 1710
Jonathan Mayhew, 1766
Emanuel Swedenborg, 1772
Benjamin Franklin, 1790
Joseph Priestley, 1804
Joseph Smith, 1805
Thomas Paine, 1809
Thomas Jefferson, 1826
James Madison, 1836
William Ellery Channing, 1842
Robert Hibbert, 1849
John Thomas (Christadelphian), 1871
Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1882
Benjamin Wilson, 18??
James Martineau, 1900
Charles Taze Russell, 1916
Neville Chamberlain, 1940
William Branham, 1965
Herbert W. Armstrong, 1986
 
Neville Chamberlain, 1940
William Branham, 1965
Herbert W. Armstrong, 1986

Neville Chamberlain ??? Who CARES what Neville Chamberlain believed??? He wasn’t known as a devoutly religious man at all, so who cares that he didn’t believe in the Trinity?

Herbert W. Armstrong founded the Worldwide Church of God.
After his death, the Worldwide Church of God fully embraced
the Trinity doctrine and is now a Trinitarian organization.
 
BibleSteve said:
The NWT was reviewed by Jason David BeDuhn, an associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff. He holds a B.A. in Religious studies from the University of Illinois, Urbana, and M.T.S. in New Testament and Christian Origins from Harvard Divinity School, and a Ph.D. in the Comparative Study of Religions from Indiana University, Bloomington.

He found the NWT translation to be one of the most accurate. It is regularly dissed by many with anti-JW hatred and agenda (kinda like the mean-spired comments I get here).

Here’s a detailed review of the book by another non-JW:

tetragrammaton.org/truthintrans.htm
Click to expand...
And here’s an interesting discussion between BeDuhn and Hommel at

forananswer.org/Mars_Jw/JB-RH.Jn1_1.Index.htm
 
TraditionalCath said:
ok so if your not inspired then, then how do you know that what your society teaches is the “truth”? how can they then claim to speak for God? how? Did God give them permission to speak on His behalf? no. so how can they claim that they are God’s mouthpiece then? they can’t! think about it steve! use your wealth of knowledge that you possess, and sincerely think about that for a minute! your basically stating that CA information in the library is wrong, and your claiming that it is false, so are you accusing the people who put it up on the site as promoting falsehood? and lies? they are telling the truth steve! are you accusing them then of promoting falsehood? say so. your honest right? say so if that is what you think. be honest and be blunt.
Click to expand...
Steve–true or false:
do JWs believe that the Faithful and Discreet Slave ‘Class’ (thru the Governing Body) is the sole channel of communication from God to man today? The only ones on Earth feeding the sheep the food at the proper time?
semantics. You may not call it inspiration. But as JWs like to point out ‘inspired’ means ‘God breathed’ --so how else does He whisper in JW ears–and JW ears alone?
Ravyn
 
Jaypeeto4 said:
Neville Chamberlain, 1940
William Branham, 1965
Herbert W. Armstrong, 1986
Neville Chamberlain ??? Who CARES what Neville Chamberlain believed??? QUOTE]

Yes, I don’t really care what he or others believed. And, I agree it seems odd that someone put his name on the list.

I was simply responding to a statement I felt was untrue. The argument was made implying EVERYONE who believed in Jesus from the time of Christ believed in the Trinity and then Russell magically popped on the scene. The link I provided showed this statement was not true.

It’s a very interesting read…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarian

Steve
Click to expand...
 
Ravyn_Guiliani said:
Steve–true or false:
do JWs believe that the Faithful and Discreet Slave ‘Class’ (thru the Governing Body) is the sole channel of communication from God to man today? The only ones on Earth feeding the sheep the food at the proper time?
semantics. You may not call it inspiration. But as JWs like to point out ‘inspired’ means ‘God breathed’ --so how else does He whisper in JW ears–and JW ears alone?
Ravyn
Click to expand...
question to you ravyn, love you name by the way! so the anointed class, the dudes at the governing body, say they get their sole communication from God to man eh? that would mean they’d have to be sort of priveledged then? inspired perhaps?
 
do JWs believe that the Faithful and Discreet Slave ‘Class’ (thru the Governing Body) is the sole channel of communication from God to man today? The only ones on Earth feeding the sheep the food at the proper time?
Click to expand...
I believe it is fair to say that JW’s would have the same answer the Catholics do on this, however, we wouldn’t claim inspiration, or infallibility.

What is the current Catholic belief about the Pope and Church on this question?
You may not call it inspiration. But as JWs like to point out ‘inspired’ means ‘God breathed’ --so how else does He whisper in JW ears–and JW ears alone?
Click to expand...
You are right, we have never claimed inspiration, although the Catholic Answers incorrectly makes that specific claim.

The Bible writers were “inspired”…

JW’s use the term “spirit-directed”. Do Catholics believe they recieved the Holy Spirit and that it directs them? I believe most do, so Catholics should have no argument with another group that similarly believes they are “spirit-directed”, and never make any claim of being 'inspired", or “infallible”.

Steve
 
TraditionalCath said:
…so the anointed class, the dudes at the governing body, say they get their sole communication from God to man eh? that would mean they’d have to be sort of priveledged then? inspired perhaps?
Click to expand...
No, not inspired. They read the Bible to determine what is correct.

From 1981 Watchtower article:

"The “slave” is not divinely inspired but continues to search the Scriptures and carefully scrutinize world events, as well as the situation of God’s people, so as to understand the ongoing fulfillment of Bible prophecy. Because of human limitations, at times there may be an incomplete or incorrect understanding of some matter that may require correction later.

But this does not mean that the “slave” should avoid publishing a possible explanation until the final, complete understanding is available. Originally, Christ’s disciples were not aware that the Kingdom would be heavenly, but Jesus realized that they would grow in knowledge under the influence of the holy spirit and therefore did not hesitate to give them a commission to be his witnesses. (Acts 1:6-8; John 14:25, 26)

This is far different than what JW-critics are trying to claim.

Steve
 
BibleSteve said:
I believe it is fair to say that JW’s would have the same answer the Catholics do on this, however, we wouldn’t claim inspiration, or infallibility.

What is the current Catholic belief about the Pope and Church on this question?

You are right, we have never claimed inspiration, although the Catholic Answers incorrectly makes that specific claim.

The Bible writers were “inspired”…

JW’s use the term “spirit-directed”. Do Catholics believe they recieved the Holy Spirit and that it directs them? I believe most do, so Catholics should have no argument with another group that similarly believes they are “spirit-directed”, and never make any claim of being 'inspired", or “infallible”.

Steve
Click to expand...
jw’s are not spirit directed. they are directed by themselves and no one else. period. the Holy Ghost does not direct anything they do.
neither does God. your statement is erroneous. The Holy Ghost would never direct a group of people who perpetuate lies. to claim that God’s active force as you call it directs the organization is erroneous. Also, by stating that it is spirit directed is basically admitting that the Holy Ghost can direct things, and that means that the Holy Ghost is the third person of the Trinity.

Don’t ever blaspheme against the Holy Ghost by claiming it directs God’s “visible organization” because the Holy Ghost would never direct anything that denies Christ’s divinity. God therefore would never direct anything that is false. that means the society.

period.
 
TraditionalCath said:
. God therefore would never direct anything that is false. that means the society.
period.
Click to expand...
Well that’s a strong opinion. Let me test to see if you hold the same consistent opinion in regards to your own Church? Has the Holy Ghost continuously guided the Church from inception down to today?

What role has the Holy Ghost had in the bad behaviors of certain popes, and regrettable behaviors the Church has more recently apologized for, like the Inquisitions, and dealings with Galileo, etc.

Steve
 
Steve, it is true that the Governing Body has stated repeatedly that they are “not inspired.”

But it is equally true that their literature has stated many, many times that God is providing information to the Slave Class not merely through best-effort Biblical Interpretation, but also by
ANGELS COMMUNICATING THE TRUE LIGHT TO THEIR MINDS, which they then publish in the literature.

At this point, it becomes a bit pointless to insist that you are not claiming to be inspired when you (they) yet claim that their doctrines are new light provided by Angels communicating the Truth to their minds, which they then publish as doctrine or predictions.

As Catholics, we are required to accept what doctrines have been officially defined by the teaching authority of the Church, defined either by an Ecumenical Council, or because the teaching can be shown to be the constant belief of the Church from the days of the apostles, or, on occasion, a solemn, ex-Cathedra definition by the Pope. There is great liberty of thought within the Catholic Church as comparatively few things have been so solemnly defined by these means.

By contrast, and you know it’s true Steve,
Jehovah’s Witnesses are absolutely forbidden to call into question ANYTHING that the Watchtower Society teaches on ANY issue at any given period of time. If you persist in questioning a particular teaching, you will be disfellowshipped and labelled an APOSTATE even if you agree wholeheartedly with EVERYTHING ELSE the Watchtower Society teaches. And when the teaching changes, as the Society’s teachings have changed and
flip-flopped many times, the Society will not show humility, apologize to you for accusing you of the heinous sin of APOSTASY and invite you back to fellowship.
There is no liberty of thought in the Watchtower Society.
And Steve, you have told us that you have read many, many
anti-JW books. As a JW, you KNOW that you are FORBIDDEN to do that and that doing that is showing disloyalty to Jehovah and to His Organization (the WTS). Steve, if the Elders find that stuff in your house, and if they are true Organization Men as most of them are, you will find yourself disfellowshiped and shunned.

Raymond Franz only disagreed with one or two points of Watchtower doctrine. Everything else he believed and continues to believe to this day. One of the things he disagreed with was the teaching (then being taught in 1980) that those alive in 1914 and able to observe with understanding the EVENTS of 1914 (people about 15 years old) would be around in significant numbers when Armageddon occured. He was disfellowshiped as an Apostate and libelled all over the Watchtower Organization with the Society’s full knowledge of the libelling and no effort to stop it. What kind of libel? I was a JW then, and we were all led to believe that Franz was involved in Homosexuality.
And guess what? It is 2007 A.D., and the Society NO LONGER CLAIMS that those who were around 15 in 1914 will be around to see Armageddon. They have changed their teaching on “that generation” to what Ray Franz understood in 1980 !! This is how horribly and wickedly this organization treats those who dissent in the slightest on even a minor point, and does not apologize to them when the “Apostate” turns out to have been correct all along.
That is sad.
By the way, Ray Franz is still an anti-Trinitarian.
 
Here is your answer regarding papal infallibility.

Papal Infallibility

The Catholic Church’s teaching on papal infallibility is one which is generally misunderstood by those outside the Church. In particular, Fundamentalists and other “Bible Christians” often confuse the charism of papal “infallibility” with “impeccability.” They imagine Catholics believe the pope cannot sin. Others, who avoid this elementary blunder, think the pope relies on some sort of amulet or magical incantation when an infallible definition is due.

Given these common misapprehensions regarding the basic tenets of papal infallibility, it is necessary to explain exactly what infallibility is not. Infallibility is not the absence of sin. Nor is it a charism that belongs only to the pope. Indeed, infallibility also belongs to the body of bishops as a whole, when, in doctrinal unity with the pope, they solemnly teach a doctrine as true. We have this from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church: “He who hears you hears me” (Luke 10:16), and “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven” (Matt. 18:18).

Vatican II’s Explanation

Vatican II explained the doctrine of infallibility as follows: “Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they can nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly. This is so, even when they are dispersed around the world, provided that while maintaining the bond of unity among themselves and with Peter’s successor, and while teaching authentically on a matter of faith or morals, they concur in a single viewpoint as the one which must be held conclusively. This authority is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church. Their definitions must then be adhered to with the submission of faith” (Lumen Gentium 25).

Infallibility belongs in a special way to the pope as head of the bishops (Matt. 16:17–19; John 21:15–17). As Vatican II remarked, it is a charism the pope “enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter.”

The infallibility of the pope is not a doctrine that suddenly appeared in Church teaching; rather, it is a doctrine which was implicit in the early Church. It is only our understanding of infallibility which has developed and been more clearly understood over time. In fact, the doctrine of infallibility is implicit in these Petrine texts: John 21:15–17 ("Feed my sheep . . . "), Luke 22:32 (“I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail”), and Matthew 16:18 ("You are Peter . . . ").

Read more here:

catholic.com/library/Papal_Infallibility.asp
 
In 1956 The Watchtower exposed Johannes Greber as being a Spiritist. They went into great detail about Johannes Greber’s occult involvement in the February 15, 1956 Watchtower.

They then quoted favorably from Johannes Greber in:

Aid to Bible understanding Page 1669, The Word
Aid to Bible understanding Page 1134, Memorial tombs
Make sure of all things… Page 489, “a god”
The Watchtower 9/15/1962 Pg 554, The Word
The Watchtower 10/15/1975 Pg 640 No Resurrection
The Watchtower 4/15/1976 Pg 231 No Resurrection
The Word Pg 5 “a God”

1]Why is their theology lining up with a spirit medium on a number of points?

2]Why did the people in charge of “food at proper time” use an occultist as a source of reliable information to quote from?

3] Can you really trust this organization for your eternal salvation?

4] Is this true that the watchtower used him to support their translation and support their theology?
 
TraditionalCath said:
question to you ravyn, love you name by the way! so the anointed class, the dudes at the governing body, say they get their sole communication from God to man eh? that would mean they’d have to be sort of priveledged then? inspired perhaps?
Click to expand...
well, not exactly–they claim to BE the sole channel of communication from God to man.

and don’t fall for Steve’s red herring—what does inspiration have to do with infallibility? A song can be inspired, an artist is inspired. He is only throwing that out there to get you all arguing about something else before this topic is done.

also just FYI–the Faithful and Discreet Slave Class is the specific group which in the past was headed by the Governing Body–but there have been legal changes in the last few years to the actual corporation–who are members of the larger group of ‘annointed’ or the ‘Remnant’ of those remaining on the Earth who have the Heavenly Calling (or are of the 144,000). When I was a young girl it was believed that any of the annointed who were functioning to serve spiritual food were part of the F&DS but the last I heard it was now encouraged to believe that the F&DS were only at headquarters in Brooklyn or on assignment from there in an official capacity. My father claimed to be one of them.

Ravyn
 
Jaypeeto4 said:
Steve, it is true that the Governing Body has stated repeatedly that they are “not inspired.”
Click to expand...
But the Catholic Answers page specifically told it’s readers JW’s “claim to be inspired prophets”.

So, I’ve shown their statement to be false.

They put out a false statement against us saying we claim something we never said… And moreover, we OVERTLY and specifically explained for about 125 years, we were not “inspired prophets”.

And yet, the Catholic Answers put out this false statement to convince their readers otherwise.

This is an example of what I saw over and over again, when I dug into all the mud slinging against JW’s. When I really looked into the charges and the quote, I saw slanted agenda, dishonest quoting, and outright fabrications against JW’s.

Steve

P.S. Similar to the big claim the Society was out lying about Franz’s education. I laid out the specifics on that supposed “lie” and showed that claim to be bogus also.
 
this post has gotten far off track. i think we’ve proven all we can. i for one don’t want to talk anymore about this issue, and its not because iam running from it, but because i have tried in vain to try to get steve to see that Jesus is God, and we have all gone above and beyond what we can prove to him.

he is not going to listen, and i do not know if he is here to try to recruit Catholics to the witness belief. but i bet he is clocking up all the time he spent here on these threads as “the preaching work” and is likely handing in his slip to the hall to be counted as witnessing.

iam not going to be part of that. he is not going to clock up time spent discussing things with me on his slip, assuming that is what he is doing. i wont be adding to that thank you very much.
i will never agree to anything he says, and so that is that.
 
Steve is not here to learn anything, he is here to count his time and beat ‘apostates’ who used to be his fellow slaves. If any JW was truly searching for answers they would not let you know they were JWs since it is a sin worthy of disfellowshipping to admit it.

Ravyn
 
BibleSteve,

Two questions:

Are you a baptized JW?

If yes, do you believe that the leadership of the Watchtower organization speaks for Jehovah on earth and that the organization is His sole channel of communication to mankind?
 
TraditionalCath said:
,I bet he is clocking up all the time he spent here on these threads as “the preaching work” and is likely handing in his slip to the hall to be counted as witnessing.
iam not going to be part of that. he is not going to clock up time spent discussing things with me on his slip, assuming that is what he is doing. i wont be adding to that thank you very much.
i will never agree to anything he says, and so that is that.
Click to expand...
I am not counting time. I am simply interested in talking with others who have read the Bible and understand it to say something differently than me. I have ALWAYS had that level of interest and open mind to want to read, listen, discuss, and learn why people believe as they do.

I would never make a statement like “I will never agree to anything you say” to anyone. It is really sad to see people say this type of thing, and then say it’s me who is “brain washed”.

In having discussions here, my hope is to notice new links, new articles, new information, and new reasoning point I can use in testing my own beliefs.

It’s unfortunate that in the process of wanting to discuss the Bible with others, I have to patiently take all the verbals stabs, insults and name calling of people who just want to vent on the WTS or JW’s.

Steve
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top