My questions to JW's

[juno24]

Bible Steve, thank you for coming here. I want to say, at the end of the day, when its all said and done- it does take bravery to come to a place where you are outnumbered.

Whether we agree about religion or not, I think we need to all take a deep breath- all of us are in desperate need to realize there are faces and feelings behind each and everyone of us.

Now, back to our battle positions! LOL

I agree. I don’t participate much in these discussions as others are much more qualified than I, but I follow most of the threads that come up in the Non-Catholic religions section with interest. We’ve had several Jehovah’s Witnesses here before, but it is rare for them to stay as long as Steve has, and it is even more rare for them to actually discuss things.
I hope Steve decides to stick around for a while and continue to give us the current JW teachings as well as learn about Catholicism.

 

[mattharris]

Yes, the Church has made decisions for which they later apologized, but never ones of defined doctrine. Those have never changed

Steve,
Does this mean your admitting that the WTS is NOT God’s Sprirt directed organization? Because I don’t think scientists have made the claim they (the scientists) are.

what about limbo?

 

[mattharris]

I’m answering as fast as I can, I’ll be glad to get to yours as soon as possible.

Steve

Hey Steve, take some advice from a veteran of these discussion boards, you don’t have to answer everything when you are outnumbered. I like to focus on the most reasonable people, or those with legitimate questions. Avoid argumentative people.

 

[Hellisreal]

what about limbo?

You need to know the difference between Dogma
and
Doctrine

And, Limbo has only been theological speculation.

Never Dogma.

This is confusing, for some faiths that do not have much theology to work with. No offense intended here, but I had to say that.

Limbo can be discussed on another anti catholic thread, and has been if you merely hit the “Search” feature, get up to speed come back and then launch your attack so you will be more informed, lest you not be armed with the facts.

The reason I am excited Bible Steve is here is that facts are not available on many issues on the official website for the JW’s.

Whereas, the CC has everything open for anyone to view.


That is why dialouge with JW’s is not easy.
Most Catholics like full citations, facts and all the information lest they look foolish.

 

[Hellisreal]

Hey Steve, take some advice from a veteran of these discussion boards, you don’t have to answer everything when you are outnumbered. I like to focus on the most reasonable people, or those with legitimate questions. Avoid argumentative people.

A “Veteran” with all of 13 posts.



Good thing you jumped in here to answer some of the questions Bible Steve is overwhelmed with now.

start with mine.

 

[mattharris]

A “Veteran” with all of 13 posts.



Good thing you jumped in here to answer some of the questions Bible Steve is overwhelmed with now.

start with mine.

sorry, should’ve said this type of DB. where the participants appear for the most part to be aggressive and antagonistic.

 

[Hellisreal]

sorry, should’ve said this * of DB. where the participants appear for the most part to be aggressive and antagonistic.*

I certianly hope you are not implicating me here sir.

I have done nothing but try to make Bible Steve feel at home here.

Could you please clarify for honesty here?

 

[mattharris]

I certianly hope you are not implicating me here sir.

I have done nothing but try to make Bible Steve feel at home here.

Could you please clarify for honesty here?

I don’t want to argue and am not familiar with you. I spoke in general. I waas not referring to you personally. From all the posts I have read most seem antagonistic. I wanted Steve to be aware that the insistence of multiple respondents of being acknowledged does not have to be indulged.

 

[Hellisreal]

Dear Mattariss,

I am respectful, and since you came to the thread, could you please answer some of my questions then?

I have not been antagonistic to Bible Steve, and if you ask him, I am sure he will agree.

So, could you please help me understand some of the things here left unclear?

I dont blame Bible Steve for not being able to address all the things presented here.

Dont even start with me, start with the OP and go one by one. I am not going anywhere all too soon. I can wait.

 

[mattharris]

Dear Mattariss,

I am respectful, and since you came to the thread, could you please answer some of my questions then?

I have not been antagonistic to Bible Steve, and if you ask him, I am sure he will agree.

So, could you please help me understand some of the things here left unclear?

I dont blame Bible Steve for not being able to address all the things presented here.

Dont even start with me, start with the OP and go one by one. I am not going anywhere all too soon. I can wait.

In all honesty, I was making aspecific somment to steve and I need you to ask me a specific question if you want an answer to something. Commenting on anything already being discussed here would be a logistical nightmare, mentally speaking. a new thread might even be in order.

 

[Ravyn_Guiliani]

sorry, should’ve said this type of DB. where the participants appear for the most part to be aggressive and antagonistic.

you mean Catholic Apologetics with some former JWs who have converted to Catholicism, and who know what they came from and will never go back to that vomit?

HellisReal–don’t even bother with MattHarris. Atleast BibleSteve is old enough to shave.

Ravyn

 

[mattharris]

you mean Catholic Apologetics with some former JWs who have converted to Catholicism, and who know what they came from and will never go back to that vomit?

HellisReal–don’t even bother with MattHarris. Atleast BibleSteve is old enough to shave.

Ravyn

I stand with my statements confirmed.

 

[Hellisreal]

I stand with my statements confirmed.

Dear Mattharris,

I will be happy to help out. Let me ask you if Angelic guidance has ever been a part of the JW true christians.

I will go back to my post that Jeff Answered, where I asked the question, and never got a JW response.

I do have other questions, like about the date Eve was created, and did it have a connection to the '75 date or not? And did it change?

 

[Hellisreal]

That is only for starters on inconsistancy.



Do you have a doctrine/dogma distinction in your teachings?

Are they available? We are only discussing the inconsistancy in the watchtowers,

there are other things to explore as Rayvn brougt to my attention.

 

[BibleSteve]

I will be happy to help out. Let me ask you if Angelic guidance has ever been a part of the JW true christians.

Dear Hellisreal,

Good Question.

JW’s have never claimed any visit by angels like the Mormons. They don’t claim any infallibility like the Pope. They don’t claim to be inspired or have special gifts of prophecy like misc. other religions.

The do believe that YHWH thinks favorably on JW’s as a group (like Catholics think of themselves also).

Anti-JW critics will want to pounce on various things that J.F. Rutherford said in the 1930’s while ignoring clarifying comments he made.

While clarifying that no one, including himself had every had a special vision, a visit by angels, or anything remotely supernatural related to angels, he did mention that YHWH has historically provide guidance and direction by means of Holy Spirit and by angels. It had been that way in the past Bible times, and he saw no reason it would be any different in modern times. He also said he didn’t know exactly how that worked, and clarified he had never been visited by any angels.

JW critics will ignore the clarifying comments and charge the Rutherford was claiming angelic channelling.

I would suggest that any of the JW-critics who feel the need to take a swipe at Rutherford on this topic, should first clarify their own position on the role angels play in guiding/directing their own life and their church.

Thanks for the good question.

 

[BibleSteve]

I do have other questions, like about the date Eve was created, and did it have a connection to the '75 date or not? And did it change?

Good Question, thanks for asking.

JW’s have correctly noted that 1975 was the 6,000th year of man’s existance. If you carefully examine all those ages provided in the OT, you can determine that Adam was created in 4026 BC. (some will argue it was 4004 BC). I’ve gone through the chronological analysis myself and it’s reasonable. (if you believe the Bible’s numbers to be truthful).

JW’s noted 1975 to be the 6,000th anniversay of that date.

It’s no secret that JW’s look to the descriptions Jesus provided in Math 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13 as indications we are living in the last days.

Given the round number of 6,000, talks were given about how “appropriate it would be” IF something happened in 1975. Comments clarifying this were made that we were not saying something WILL happen, only how appropriate it would be IF something happened.

Since JW’s live their lives in complete anticipation that tommorow might be the day, there was lots of excitement and anticipation around the question IF something might happen. Some people had some overly eager expectations.

There was no prophecy made, no claim of some “inspiration”, no claim that anything WOULD happen.

JW critics charge this was some “inspired prophecy” that was incorrect. This is not true.

The Eve angle was related to when that creative day had closed. They subsequently observed they were counting the 6,000 years from Adams creation, not the close of the Creative day after Eve had been created. There was obviously some period of time between the time Adam was created and Eve was created.

So, although it can be calculated when Adam was created, no calculation is possible to know how long he went without Eve and the close of the creative day occurred.

Thanks again,

Steve

 

[BibleSteve]

Do you have a doctrine/dogma distinction in your teachings?

Here’s a good overview of JW beliefs:

watchtower.org/e/jt/index.htm

Click on the “What Do They Believe” link on the left

Steve

 

[Hellisreal]

Thank you Bible Steve for giving me a very thorough reply to my questions.

I am happy to see a JW response to my questions, and grateful I can take a look at your point of view and digest it.

I hope you will continue to stay to help us understand the JW point of view, and let us come to our own conclusions.

Please come back and continue to post about anything you think we as Catholics dont understand about your beliefs.

It is better we know what your faith teaches, and the truth about your faith if we are to have any kind of fruitful dialoge here.

Unfortunately, we are in the dark about so much your faith is all about it seems. So its good you can fill in the blanks that the official site leaves to the imagination.

Please stay.

 

[Hellisreal]

Here’s a good overview of JW beliefs:

watchtower.org/e/jt/index.htm

Click on the “What Do They Believe” link on the left

Steve

I have seen this, but its good you post it for those who have not seen it.

As I said before, please help us to see things we can not find for ourselves on your official JW site.

You could be a wonderful witness to your faith if you could help all here see what we are not privy to.

Thanks for hanging out here!

 

[Claude_Kenneson]

Good Question, thanks for asking.

JW’s have correctly noted that 1975 was the 6,000th year of man’s existance. If you carefully examine all those ages provided in the OT, you can determine that Adam was created in 4026 BC. (some will argue it was 4004 BC). I’ve gone through the chronological analysis myself and it’s reasonable. (if you believe the Bible’s numbers to be truthful).

JW’s noted 1975 to be the 6,000th anniversay of that date.

It’s no secret that JW’s look to the descriptions Jesus provided in Math 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13 as indications we are living in the last days.

Given the round number of 6,000, talks were given about how “appropriate it would be” IF something happened in 1975. Comments clarifying this were made that we were not saying something WILL happen, only how appropriate it would be IF something happened.

Since JW’s live their lives in complete anticipation that tommorow might be the day, there was lots of excitement and anticipation around the question IF something might happen. Some people had some overly eager expectations.

There was no prophecy made, no claim of some “inspiration”, no claim that anything WOULD happen.

JW critics charge this was some “inspired prophecy” that was incorrect. This is not true.

The Eve angle was related to when that creative day had closed. They subsequently observed they were counting the 6,000 years from Adams creation, not the close of the Creative day after Eve had been created. There was obviously some period of time between the time Adam was created and Eve was created.

So, although it can be calculated when Adam was created, no calculation is possible to know how long he went without Eve and the close of the creative day occurred.

Thanks again,

Steve

I read somewhere that although the Watchtower at times advised caution, the March 15, 1980 issue (page 17) also made some type of admission that the writers of the Jehovah’s Witness literature published statements on 1975 that were more definite than advisable. IF people had overly eager expectations, where did they obtain them? Should the rank and file be blamed for what the “faithful and discreet slave” was dispensing to them? 1975 didn’t come from the rank and file. Now, when the rank and file ran with it, did the Watchtower Society attempt to quell it or encourage it? Could you get that quote for us, please?

Nevermind. I found the quote plus many others. Read and see if 1975 was taught with an IF.

quotes-watchtower.co.uk/1975.html