LDS and JW's

[dianaiad]

argh diana, it was funnier my way!

Never mind, Religio…I’ll let you deal with the Kobol/Krypton screwup.

 

[Religio71]

Never mind, Religio…I’ll let you deal with the Kobol/Krypton screwup.

Haha, Krypton! See, I hate when people come here or on CARM (yes…I post there…) and say things like “Catholics worship Mary!”, “Catholics believe everything the Pope says because he’s always infallible!”, “Catholics pray to statues!”, etc. So before I discuss the LDS Church, at least let’s get on the same terms, and thinking that God lives on a planet called Kobal or God sexually impregnated Mary aren’t doctrines.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

“Who is God?”

JW’S ANSWER: The true God is not omnipresent, for he is spoken of as having a location. (1Ki 8:49; Joh 16:28; Heb 9:24) His throne is in heaven. (Isa 66:1)

I’d question the accuracy of this claim. I’ve never seen an official JW document that said this.

The claim is plainly false anyway, for God to have location makes Him finite and even confined to the material world. Further, pointing to His “throne” is an error because God the Father doesn’t have a body.

“Who is Christ?”

JW’S ANSWER:

vindication.xanga.com/649437175/item/

It is a very weak attempt for JWs to equate Jesus with Michael the Archangel, the proof simply isn’t there. The 1 Thes 4:16; Jude and Rev 12 are nowhere near the evidence needed, infact the evidence points away from that claim.
One big example is that that link quotes 1 Thes 4:16 as “the archangel’s voice” when that’s not the Greek, even the JW Bible gets it right and says “an archangel’s voice,” which is indefinite article! There is no OT evidence nor especially NT evidence for that claim…yet the JW credibility hang on that doctrine.

“How are They related to one another?”

JW’S ANSWER: Prehuman Existence. The person who became known as Jesus Christ did not begin life here on earth. He himself spoke of his prehuman heavenly life. (Joh 3:13; 6:38, 62; 8:23, 42, 58)

This is why the JWs had to come up with the Michael the Archangel claim, because Jesus had pre-human existence…but the truth is he wasn’t an angel.

Ask yourselves: What does the word “of” mean in “firstborn OF all creation” Of means ‘taken from’

The term “firstborn” in Hebrew thought means the pre-eminent, it doesn’t automatically mean the literal first born. Various OT figures were called “first born” as a sign of their highest status, though in fact they were not the literal first born (Ex 4:22 is a great example where Israel/Jacob is called “firstborn” when Esau was infact literally born first).

See the links I gave above for some other problematic JW doctrines, which have weak foundation in the Scriptures.

 

[dianaiad]

Haha, Krypton! See, I hate when people come here or on CARM (yes…I post there…) and say things like “Catholics worship Mary!”, “Catholics believe everything the Pope says because he’s always infallible!”, “Catholics pray to statues!”, etc. So before I discuss the LDS Church, at least let’s get on the same terms, and thinking that God lives on a planet called Kobal or God sexually impregnated Mary aren’t doctrines.

I have to admit that so far you haven’t presented LDS beliefs inaccurately. It gives me hope that when you get around to actually criticizing something you disagree with, we will actually have some decent discussions.

 

[dianaiad]

I’d question the accuracy of this claim. I’ve never seen an official JW document that said this.

Well, I’m certain that if you ask Dave, he will be able to point you to the ‘official document’ you require. In the meantime, I’m willing to take his word for what his beliefs actually are. Whether they are ‘true’ or not is an entirely different matter. Let’s figure out what they ARE, first, shall we? Starting off by telling him he doesn’t really believe what he claims to is counterproductive.

The claim is plainly false anyway, for God to have location makes Him finite and even confined to the material world. Further, pointing to His “throne” is an error because God the Father doesn’t have a body.

Well, that’s begging a few questions.

It is a very weak attempt for JWs to equate Jesus with Michael the Archangel, the proof simply isn’t there. The 1 Thes 4:16; Jude and Rev 12 are nowhere near the evidence needed, infact the evidence points away from that claim.
One big example is that that link quotes 1 Thes 4:16 as “the archangel’s voice” when that’s not the Greek, even the JW Bible gets it right and says “an archangel’s voice,” which is indefinite article! There is no OT evidence nor especially NT evidence for that claim…yet the JW credibility hang on that doctrine.

This is why the JWs had to come up with the Michael the Archangel claim, because Jesus had pre-human existence…but the truth is he wasn’t an angel.

The term “firstborn” in Hebrew thought means the pre-eminent, it doesn’t automatically mean the literal first born. Various OT figures were called “first born” as a sign of their highest status, though in fact they were not the literal first born (Ex 4:22 is a great example where Israel/Jacob is called “firstborn” when Esau was infact literally born first).

See the links I gave above for some other problematic JW doctrines, which have weak foundation in the Scriptures.

I see, so you are going to tell Dave what he really believes, and then argue with that?

Hope that works out for you.

 

[cthulhubryan]

But you forgot the other parts- God is flesh and blood on a planet called Kobal (or is it Kolab? One is where their god lives and the other is where superman is from…); Adam was/is Christ, and there was no true original sin; Mary was impregnated by God in the flesh; If you are a good Mormon you will become a god of a planet and since you are sealed to a woman she will be the senior wife and you two will birth children who will populate your planet; your blood, should you be a sinner, will wash you of your sins- hence blood atonement- either you taking your own life or someone taking it for you (suicide or assisted suicide), which speaks loudly that your blood will wash you clean and the value of Christ’s Passion is of a lesser value. And why should they pray to Jesus Christ, once you have attained your godhood with them you will be equal to him. You decide- the poison of LDS is there, be careful… many will come in My name… he has warned us.

A planet near the Star Kolob. Adam and Christ are two separate entities. There were some LDS talks equating Adam with God the Father but never with Christ. The apotheosis part is not as broad as you make it seem. A male who is married (one cannot achieve the Celestial Kingdom without marriage, though there is even discussion about that. But you have to be married to achieve apotheosis) plus does all the correct Temple work may become a deity since “As man now is, God once was. As God now is, man may become”

The discussion of your blood’s value vs Christ’s is relatively irrelevant since you have to believe in Christ to get to the point of apotheosis. Therefore the way it is mentioned above is misleading.

 

[dj_dave]

First… Dianaiad while I’m sure we have some disagreements, thank you for your tact and kind way of voicing your comments.

Now, as for Catholic Crude—i—mean Catholic Dude.

I’d question the accuracy of this claim. I’ve never seen an official JW document that said this.

It’s interesting that you spend so much of your time looking through our material.
By the way–the information comes directly from out “Insight On The Scriptures" Vol I

Be careful Prov 18:13

The claim is plainly false anyway, for God to have location makes Him finite and even confined to the material world. Further, pointing to His “throne” is an error because God the Father doesn’t have a body.

*Did I not give scriptural evidence of these claims?
Does He Have a Body?

*God is a spirit Person, which means that he does not have a material body, but a spiritual one. A spirit has a body? Yes, for we read, “If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one.” (1 Cor. 15:44; John 4:24) God being an individual, a Person with a spirit body, has a place where he resides, and so he could not be at any other place at the same time. Thus we read at 1 Kings 8:43 that the heavens are God’s “established place of dwelling.” Also, we are told at Hebrews 9:24 that “Christ entered . . . into heaven itself, now to appear before the person of God for us.”

It could well be that some have been confused due to the fact that God is allseeing; also his power can be felt everywhere. (2 Chron. 16:9) We might illustrate these facts by likening God to an electric power plant. It has a certain location on a certain street in a city. But its electricity is distributed over all the city, providing light and power. And so with Jehovah God. He has a location in the highest heavens, but his active force, his holy spirit, furnishes enlightenment, and its force can be felt everywhere, over all the universe.
While the Bible repeatedly warns that God’s worshipers are not to presume to make any likeness of him and not to bow down and worship such a likeness, it does use anthropomorphisms; that is, it ascribes to God human characteristics. Thus the Bible speaks of God’s face, his eyes and ears, his nostrils and mouth, his arms and feet. (Deut. 4:15-20; Ps. 27:8; 1 Pet. 3:12; Ps. 18:15; Isa. 1:20; Deut. 33:27; Isa. 41:2) Of course, such descriptive language does not mean that his spirit body has the same kind of members that human bodies have. But by means of these expressions we are helped, inasmuch as Jehovah God thus becomes more real to us.**

(John 16:28) I came out from the Father and have come into the world. Further, I am leaving the world and am going my way to the Father.”

It is a very weak attempt for JWs to equate Jesus with Michael the Archangel, the proof simply isn’t there. The 1 Thes 4:16; Jude and Rev 12 are nowhere near the evidence needed, infact the evidence points away from that claim.
One big example is that that link quotes 1 Thes 4:16 as “the archangel’s voice” when that’s not the Greek, even the JW Bible gets it right and says “an archangel’s voice,” which is indefinite article! There is no OT evidence nor especially NT evidence for that claim…yet the JW credibility hang on that doctrine.

The link I gave you left absolutely no doubt to a reasoning person the Michael COULD be Jesus. vindication.xanga.com/649437175/item/
Did you know along with the scholars quoted that there are hundreds of churches that believe it also?There is only one Archangel. Arch meaning Foremost The prefix “arch,” meaning “chief” or “principal,” implies that there is only one archangel, the chief angel; in the Scriptures, “archangel” is never found in the plural.

This is why the JWs had to come up with the Michael the Archangel claim, because Jesus had pre-human existence…but the truth is he wasn’t an angel.

Both the Hebrew mal•’akh′ and the Greek ag′ge•los literally mean “messenger.” From the first book of the Bible to the last, these words occur nearly 400 times. When spirit messengers are indicated, the words are translated “angels,” but if the reference definitely is to human creatures, the rendering is “messengers.” (Ge 16:7; 32:3; Jas 2:25; Re 22:8; Would you say Christ was a messenger? SEE John 18:37; Mark 4:43; Luke 8:1

The term “firstborn” in Hebrew thought means the pre-eminent, it doesn’t automatically mean the literal first born. Various OT figures were called “first born” as a sign of their highest status, though in fact they were not the literal first born (Ex 4:22 is a great example where Israel/Jacob is called “firstborn” when Esau was infact literally born first).

*You are correct! Reuben was seated by Joseph at a meal according to his right as firstborn. (Ge 43:33) But the Bible does not always honor the firstborn by listing sons according to birth. The first place is often given to the most prominent or faithful of the sons rather than to the firstborn.—Ge 6:10; 1Ch 1:28; compare Ge 11:26, 32; 12:4 pre-eminent ,

“it doesn’t automatically mean”—then you are saying it COULD mean what I have stated.

Jesus Christ is shown to be “the firstborn of all creation” as well as “the firstborn from the dead”—not merely most distinguished in relation to those created or those resurrected but the first one actually created and the first raised from the dead to endless life. (Col 1:15, 18; Re 1:5; 3:14) On earth he was the firstborn child of Mary and was presented at the temple in accordance with Jehovah’s law. (Lu 2:7, 22, 23) The apostle Paul speaks of the followers of Jesus Christ who have been enrolled in the heavens as “the congregation of the firstborn,” the first ones accepted by God as sons on the basis of their faith in Jesus’ sacrifice and the first of Christ’s followers to be resurrected with no need to die again.—Heb 12:23.

The point I was making was the firstborn mentioned in the Bible are still “from” creation as was Jesus. Would you ever say that Almighty God is “firstborn of all CREATION”?*
More later…

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Now, as for Catholic Crude—i—mean Catholic Dude.

I’m not sure where I was “crude,” but ok.

It’s interesting that you spend so much of your time looking through our material.
By the way–the information comes directly from out “Insight On The Scriptures" Vol I

I look through other group’s literature precisely so that I reduce the chances of misrepresenting them. I don’t like when Catholicism is misrepresented, so when I talk about other groups I try to do my homework. If I’m mistaken on stuff, I retract and apologize, because that’s not my intention.

 

[yellowbird]

Hi dj dave,
You quoted, “In the begining was the word and the word was with God and the word was a god.”

Catholics believe there is only One True God - do you believe there are more than one true God? Because if Jehovah is the One True God - and yet Jesus is another god… what does that make Him, a false god? Or a second true God?

 

[yellowbird]

The point I was making was the firstborn mentioned in the Bible are still “from” creation as was Jesus. Would you ever say that Almighty God is “firstborn of all CREATION”?

More later…

Jesus could NOT have been created. According to John 1:3 :

Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Notice that it says that Jesus made ALL THINGS and NOTHING… not ONE THING… NOTHING was made apart from Him.

How could Jesus be a created being if NOTHING was made apart from Him?

I find it curious that your New World Translation adds the word [other] … Through him all [other] things were made. Those pesky little [brackets] attest to the fact that the word [other] is added and NOT part of the Bible text. Adding to the Bible is a big :tsktsk: Rev 22:18.

 

[dianaiad]

Jesus could NOT have been created. According to John 1:3 :

Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Notice that it says that Jesus made ALL THINGS and NOTHING… not ONE THING… NOTHING was made apart from Him.

How could Jesus be a created being if NOTHING was made apart from Him?

I find it curious that your New World Translation adds the word [other] … Through him all [other] things were made. Those pesky little [brackets] attest to the fact that the word [other] is added and NOT part of the Bible text. Adding to the Bible is a big :tsktsk: Rev 22:18.

I agree with you that messing with scripture and adding stuff is not a good idea (the johanine comma, anyone?)

I wonder why the Jehovah’s Witnesses include the ‘other’ in brackets? What is the reasoning behind the addition?

 

[zerinus]

“Who is God?”

JW’S ANSWER: The true God is not a nameless God. His name is Jehovah. (De 6:4; Ps 83:18) He is God by reason of his creatorship. (Ge 1:1; Re 4:11) The true God is real (Joh 7:28), and not lifeless natural law operating without a living lawgiver, not blind force working through a series of accidents to develop one thing or another.
His attributes. The true God is not omnipresent, for he is spoken of as having a location. (1Ki 8:49; Joh 16:28; Heb 9:24) His throne is in heaven. (Isa 66:1) He is all-powerful, being the Almighty God. (Ge 17:1; Re 16:14) “All things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of him,” and he is “the One telling from the beginning the finale.” (Heb 4:13; Isa 46:10, 11; 1Sa 2:3) His power and knowledge extend everywhere, reaching every part of the universe.—2Ch 16:9; Ps 139:7-12; Am 9:2-4.

Some of God’s primary attributes are love (1Jo 4:8), wisdom (Pr 2:6; Ro 11:33), justice (De 32:4; Lu 18:7, 8), and power (Job 37:23; Lu 1:35). He is a God of order and of peace. (1Co 14:33) He is completely holy, clean and pure (Isa 6:3; Hab 1:13; Re 4:8); happy (1Ti 1:11); and merciful (Ex 34:6; Lu 6:36). Many other qualities of his personality are described in the Scriptures.
His position. Jehovah is the Supreme Sovereign of the universe, the King eternal. (Ps 68:20; Da 4:25, 35; Ac 4:24; 1Ti 1:17) The position of his throne is the ultimate for superiority. (Eze 1:4-28; Da 7:9-14; Re 4:1-8) He is the Majesty (Heb 1:3; 8:1), the Majestic God, the Majestic One. (1Sa 4:8; Isa 33:21) He is the Source of all life.—Job 33:4; Ps 36:9; Ac 17:24, 25.

“Who is Christ?”

JW’S ANSWER: The name and title of the Son of God from the time of his anointing while on earth.
The name Jesus (Gr., I•e•sous′) corresponds to the Hebrew name Jeshua (or, in fuller form, Jehoshua), meaning “Jehovah Is Salvation.” The name itself was not unusual, many men being so named in that period. For this reason persons often added further identification, saying, “Jesus the Nazarene.” (Mr 10:47; Ac 2:22) Christ is from the Greek Khri•stos′, the equivalent of the Hebrew Ma•shi′ach (Messiah), and means “Anointed One.” Whereas the expression “anointed one” was properly applied to others before Jesus, such as Moses, Aaron, and David (Heb 11:24-26; Le 4:3; 8:12; 2Sa 22:51), the position, office, or service to which these were anointed only prefigured the superior position, office, and service of Jesus Christ. Jesus is therefore preeminently and uniquely “the Christ, the Son of the living God.”—Mt 16:16; see also

vindication.xanga.com/649437175/item/

“How are They related to one another?”

JW’S ANSWER: Prehuman Existence. The person who became known as Jesus Christ did not begin life here on earth. He himself spoke of his prehuman heavenly life. (Joh 3:13; 6:38, 62; 8:23, 42, 58) John 1:1, 2 gives the heavenly name of the one who became Jesus, saying: “In the beginning the Word [Gr., Lo′gos] was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god “was divine,” AT; Mo; or “of divine being,” Böhmer; Stage (both German)]. This one was in the beginning with God.” Since Jehovah is eternal and had no beginning (Ps 90:2; Re 15:3), the Word’s being with God from “the beginning” must here refer to the beginning of Jehovah’s creative works. This is confirmed by other texts identifying Jesus as “the firstborn of all creation,” “the beginning of the creation by God.” (Col 1:15; Re 1:1; 3:14) Thus the Scriptures identify the Word (Jesus in his prehuman existence) as God’s first creation, his firstborn Son. Ask yourselves: What does the word “of” mean in “firstborn OF all creation” Of means ‘taken from’

Thank you dj dave for your comments. The most fundamental theological difference between Mormonism and JWs is that we believe Jesus=Jehovah. If the truth of that equality can be conclusively demonstrated from the Bible, it pretty much wrecks JW theology, because it is almost entirely founded on the supposition that that equality is not true. We believe that the equality of Jesus with Jehovah can be conclusively demonstrated from the Bible, both Old and New Testaments.

 

[yellowbird]

Hi Zerinus,
I’m trying to understand your position on Jesus = Jehovah. While Jesus was on Earth, who was in Heaven? Was it not Jehovah (the Father) or is there a Heavenly Father above Jesus/Jehovah?

 

[yellowbird]

Back to the OP’s questions - more differences between the two:

1. JW’s are not patriotic… no flags, no military service, no voting whereas LDS
   can participate in all of those things and in fact often hold office.
2. JW’s do NOT believe in higher education. LDS students are encouraged to get an
   education.
3. JW’s do not allow their children to participate on sports teams, scouts, cheerleading
   etc. (At least in the past - maybe this has changed… dj dave?)
4. JW’s would NEVER say that Mother Theresa was a good Christian woman since she belonged to a FALSE religion. Not sure how the LDS’s feel about other Christian religious leaders.
5. JW’s are not allowed to contribute to charitable organizations… even those who’s mission is to aleviate human suffering such as the Red Cross.
6. JW’s drink alcohol. LDS do not.
7. JW women are not allowed to wear pants to their “meetings.” Not sure about LDS?
8. JW’s are not encouraged to have children - since this system of things is soon to end. LDS are encouraged to have big families. (Is that true Zerinus or is that more of a cultural thing… I came from a big family so I’d like a big family?)
9. JW’s desegregated their congregations long before it was socially acceptable… espeically in the South… Many African Americans are elders and overseers… holding positions of power. Not so much with the LDS …they had a rather disturbing view of people of color that I believe has since been changed. (?)

 

[zerinus]

Hi Zerinus,
I’m trying to understand your position on Jesus = Jehovah. While Jesus was on Earth, who was in Heaven? Was it not Jehovah (the Father) or is there a Heavenly Father above Jesus/Jehovah?

Hi! We (LDS) believe that God the Father and the Son are two separate beings. We also believe that Jehovah in the Old Testament (in most instances at least) refers to Jesus Christ in His pre-mortal state, not to the Father.

 

[yellowbird]

Hi! We (LDS) believe that God the Father and the Son are two separate beings. We also believe that Jehovah in the Old Testament (in most instances at least) refers to Jesus Christ in His pre-mortal state, not to the Father.

Gotcha. So when my LDS friend talks of her Heavenly Father, she is not speaking of Jesus, correct? Is it this:

Jehovah = Jesus

but Jesus/Jehovah does not = Heavenly Father

 

[zerinus]

1. JW’s would NEVER say that Mother Theresa was a good Christian woman since she belonged to a FALSE religion. Not sure how the LDS’s feel about other Christian religious leaders.

We certainly think that Mother Theresa was a saintly and good Christian woman, and there have been (still are) many like her in other Christian religions.

1. JW’s are not encouraged to have children - since this system of things is soon to end. LDS are encouraged to have big families. (Is that true Zerinus or is that more of a cultural thing… I came from a big family so I’d like a big family?)

Yep! That is true. Mormons are not pressured to have large families, but they think it is a good thing to have them.

 

[zerinus]

Gotcha. So when my LDS friend talks of her Heavenly Father, she is not speaking of Jesus, correct? Is it this:

Jehovah = Jesus

but Jesus/Jehovah does not = Heavenly Father

Yep! You got that one right too. When Mormons pray formally, they address their prayers to God the Father, in the name of His Son Jesus Christ.

 

[dianaiad]

Back to the OP’s questions - more differences between the two:

1. JW’s are not patriotic… no flags, no military service, no voting whereas LDS
   can participate in all of those things and in fact often hold office.
2. JW’s do NOT believe in higher education. LDS students are encouraged to get an
   education.
3. JW’s do not allow their children to participate on sports teams, scouts, cheerleading
   etc. (At least in the past - maybe this has changed… dj dave?)
4. JW’s would NEVER say that Mother Theresa was a good Christian woman since she belonged to a FALSE religion. Not sure how the LDS’s feel about other Christian religious leaders.
5. JW’s are not allowed to contribute to charitable organizations… even those who’s mission is to aleviate human suffering such as the Red Cross.
6. JW’s drink alcohol. LDS do not.
7. JW women are not allowed to wear pants to their “meetings.” Not sure about LDS?
8. JW’s are not encouraged to have children - since this system of things is soon to end. LDS are encouraged to have big families. (Is that true Zerinus or is that more of a cultural thing… I came from a big family so I’d like a big family?)
9. JW’s desegregated their congregations long before it was socially acceptable… espeically in the South… Many African Americans are elders and overseers… holding positions of power. Not so much with the LDS …they had a rather disturbing view of people of color that I believe has since been changed. (?)

I don’t know if you are correct about the JW’s, but you are correct about the Mormons in those things you mention. To the Mormons, the things you mention seem to be mostly cultural, not deeply dogmatic. I don’t know where they fall in JW thought.

I found your choice of things to mention interesting. (Pants in church? I wonder where that falls in the importance of things?)

 

[yellowbird]

I don’t know if you are correct about the JW’s, but you are correct about the Mormons in those things you mention. To the Mormons, the things you mention seem to be mostly cultural, not deeply dogmatic. I don’t know where they fall in JW thought.

I found your choice of things to mention interesting. (Pants in church? I wonder where that falls in the importance of things?)

Interesting? How so? Just odd little bits of trivia I guess. Everyone else was talking about theological differerences… I thought I’d add the practical living differences.

And the no pants on women “in service” or at meetings IS a big deal to JW’s… as is no facial hair - like beards on men.

You think it’s a cultural thing… it’s actually an important aspect of the JW life…one must follow ALL the rules to show obidence to Jehovah.

Another difference: All JWs are required to go out “in service” - knocking on doors, trying to get people to take their literature. They are required to keep track of the # of hours spent “in service” and submit a report at the end of each month. If a JW skips a month, he is considered “irregular”… several skipped months and he’s considered an “inactive JW.” Those were the terms when I was more closely associated with the JWs… not sure if they are still used today.

I believe only LDS men are encouraged to become Missionaries - in their late teens for a period of two years. Maybe life long missionary work is an option as well, but I don’t believe it’s required of everyone. Zerinus?

Another difference: JWs: If a serious sin becomes known to the elders, the gulity JW is brought before them and even if he expresses repentance, the elders may decide that he should be shunned by the congregation for a period of time - usually 6 months if he’s repentant. He must continue to attend all meetings but no one may speak to him - including family members who reside outside his home. After the time has passed, the JW again goes before the elders and they decide if he has been forgiven, or if more time must pass.

I believe that a repentant LDS member does not recieve the same treatment from his congregation. Repentant being key. Again - Zerinus would have to respond to that?