New World Translation.. Dispose of it

[Abeyta85]

I think the reason so many are fiercely anti the NWT isn’t so much from a translation accuracy point of view, but because they are fiercely against what the JW’s teach and are angry that they are able to do so on a world wide scale.

Time and again we see recommendations “Don’t engage the witnesses in a Bible discussion!”
A favourite excuse is: “They have changed the Bible to suit themselves! They have written their own one!”
But of course, we will teach you what the Bible says from whatever translation you prefer.
John 14:28 says: “The Father is greater than I am” in every translation I have ever read. (sorry trinity)
Ezekiel 18:4 says: “The soul that sins will die” in every translation (Sorry immortal soul and hellfire)
I could go on indefinitely…

Also remember, the NWT wasn’t complete until 1961.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses took their name in 1935. The Watchtower had been published since 1879. So in 1961 The JW’s were already approaching 1 million active members spread through most of the world. They had been happily showing people the truth from whatever Bible was available for decades before the NWT existed. Any many languages we teach the NWT still isn’t available.
The excuse “you’ve written your own Bible” is just an excuse.

Opponents will go to huge lengths to try to dis-credit us. We all know you can find all sorts of anti-witness stuff on the internet. People rake through 100 years of WT articles looking for faults and changes. What is with that?

They are desperate to discredit us. They don’t often resort to charges of sedition or mob violence like the clergy did in American in WW1 and later, they can’t, and are losing their power fast, so they have to try other means now.

There is superb logic in what a law teacher said once, which God has seen fit to include in the Holy scriptures. In Acts 5:33-39, the apostles were accosted by the religious leaders for teaching about Jesus. Gamaliel reasoned: “If their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourself fighting against God.”

Haha. Have fun.

John 14:28 says: “The Father is greater than I am” in every translation I have ever read. (sorry trinity)

Sorry, no apologies to the Holy Trinity, The Father is greater than the son in the order. So yes.
Also look at John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.” Or, “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). Or, “All that the Father has is mine” (John 16:15). Or, “The Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God” (John 5:18). Or, “[Jesus], though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be g.asped” (Phil. 2:6).

No apologies to the Holy Trinity,

Ezekiel 18:4 Hell No, We Won’t Go?
And the smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name" (Rev. 14:11)

No Apologies again, but thanks!

Lets talk about the NWT, lets see… Who wrote translated the NWT? The translation was made by an “anonymous” committee? Well yes for a time. Why wouldn’t they tell us who translated the NWT?

Nathan Knorr, Fred Franz, Albert Schroeder, George Gangas, and Milton Henschel were later identified as the men that created the text, which is used by no other sect. Franz studied non-biblical Greek for two years, and taught himself Hebrew. Self taught? yea and I am self taught rocket scientist! The rest had no formal training in any biblical language. The text of the NWT is more of a transliteration to fit theological presumptions than it is a true translation. This can be seen in key verses that the WTS changed in order to fit its doctrines.

If I were to make you a rocket spaceship, and I have minimal (Self Taught) training, would you take it for a spin? Yea I didn’t think so, so why would you trust a bible written by 5 men who had no credentials?

The NWT also translates the Greek word kurios (“Lord”) as “Jehovah” dozens of times in the NT, despite the fact that the word “Jehovah” is never used by any NT author. It should also be asked why the NWT does not translate kurios as “Jehovah” in Romans 10:9, 1 Corinthians 12:3, Philippians 2:11, 2 Thessalonians 2:1, and Revelation 22:21. If it did translate kyrios consistently, then Jesus would be Jehovah!

I don’t think anyone digs to discredit the NWT or the Jehovah Witness organization, history proves it for itself.

God Bless!

 

[Regardless]

Touché Collegue. You are a scholar!
Have you never asked these questions of one of Jehovah’s Witnesses before?

John 14:28 says: “The Father is greater than I am” in every translation I have ever read. (sorry trinity)
Sorry, no apologies to the Holy Trinity, The Father is greater than the son in the order. So yes.

Good.

Also look at John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.”

Jesus Christ said those words. He also said that in John 17:22. But there he was praying to his Father (note, not to himself) that his followers also be One “Just as we are One.”
What did he mean? He wanted his followers to be united. Work together with one accord. (Not somehow become the same being or godhead) United. “Just as we are One.”

Or, “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9).

Much the same. Jesus had existed with his father for countless millennia in heaven. Hence he was so much like his Father Col. 1:15 calls him “The image of the invisible God.”

So, “he who has seen me has seen the Father.” Is correct. They are so alike. Or as Jesus said in John 12:44,45: “He who see’s me see’s him who sent me.” He was not God himself, but sent by him.

Or, “The Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God” (John 5:18).

That’s what the Jews claimed he was saying. Jesus immediately corrected them. Read the next five versus. It totally contradicts any idea of a Trinity.

Or, “[Jesus], though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be g.asped” (Phil. 2:6).

The translation you quote sounds pretty good. Some make it sound like Jesus thought he had every right to be equal to God. “Did not think it robbery to be equal to God”
The greek word is har.pa’zo. It doesn’t mean ‘hold onto’ or ‘retain’, as if he had it. But ‘seize, snatch violently’. Hence the NWT translates it: “although existing in God’s form gave no consideration to a seizure, namely that he should be equal to God.” (same thought as your Bible)
The verse is saying Jesus never thought he should try to be equal to God. Which fits well with the context vs. 5 introduces. = His followers should act the same.

Sometimes with a verse that appears to support the Trinity, all you have to do is read the context to find it is not so.
Of course, none of the verses you site contain the word Trinity or mention three people.

Ezekiel 18:4 Hell No, We Won’t Go?
And the smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name" (Rev. 14:11)

God Bless!

The beast and it’s image and the mark are all symbolic. Could the fire and suffering be symbolic too?
Rev 20:10 shows other symbolic entities in the lake of fire. And Rev. 20:14 says: death and ‘Hell’ (greek hades) are thrown in there too. Can hell be cast into hell?
Much of revelation is symbolic.
We know the soul dies (Ezekiel 18:4), the wages of sin is death (not torture) (Rom. 6:23)
at death we are aquitted of our sins (Rom. 6:7), and both good and bad will be resurected. (Acts 24:15). All contradicting the teaching of hellfire.

And logically, if there is a literal place of fire and torture, how does that fit with 1 John 4:8. “God is love.” We are made in God’s image, what would you think of someone who allows torture as a form of punishment, especially eternally? There must be people who have been there - suffering for thousands of years because of a few decades of sin. Yuck.

Thanks for you reply. i had better answer the rest in another post.

 

[Abeyta85]

Good.

Jesus Christ said those words. He also said that in John 17:22. But there he was praying to his Father (note, not to himself) that his followers also be One “Just as we are One.”
What did he mean? He wanted his followers to be united. Work together with one accord. (Not somehow become the same being or godhead) United. “Just as we are One.”

Close, you kind of have the the concept down. Agreed Jesus was not talking to himself. He was talk to the Father! Good Job!

Much the same. Jesus had existed with his father for countless millennia in heaven. Hence he was so much like his Father Col. 1:15 calls him “The image of the invisible God.”

So, “he who has seen me has seen the Father.” Is correct. They are so alike. Or as Jesus said in John 12:44,45: “He who see’s me see’s him who sent me.” He was not God himself, but sent by him.

Interesting interpretation… However the bible does not support your theory. Where in the bible does it say We are alike but not the same? Sorry, not good enough.

That’s what the Jews claimed he was saying. Jesus. Jesus immediately corrected them. Read the next five versus. It totally contradicts any idea of a Trinity.

Ohhh right right right… they “Thought”… :tsktsk:

As a Catholic I believe every one of those next 5 verses… In fact as a Catholic I believe in the whole bible, because it continues to prove …guess what… Holy Trinity!

The translation you quote sounds pretty good. Some make it sound like Jesus thought he had every right to be equal to God. “Did not think it robbery to be equal to God”
The greek word is har.pa’zo. It doesn’t mean ‘hold onto’ or ‘retain’, as if he had it. But ‘seize, snatch violently’. Hence the NWT translates it: “although existing in God’s form gave no consideration to a seizure, namely that he should be equal to God.” (same thought as your Bible)
The verse is saying Jesus never thought he should try to be equal to God. Which fits well with the context vs. 5 introduces. = His followers should act the same.

Sometimes with a verse that appears to support the Trinity, all you have to do is read the context to find it is not so. Of course, none of the verses you site contain the word Trinity or mention three people.

No, the bible doesn’t mention the word trinity, but it is taught throughout the bible, so in fact you believe in Unitarianism but the bible doesn’t mention that word… does it?

How do we make sense of all this? By keeping in mind that Jesus is both God and man. Some verses, such as these last five, refer exclusively to his Godhead. Others refer to his humanity. So far as he is God, Jesus is equal to the Father. Christ’s human nature, though, is created and is therefore inferior to the Father. But to focus on this aspect of Christ to the exclusion of his divine nature is a gross misunderstanding of who and what the Bible says Jesus Christ is. Other verses cited by the Witnesses, such as Matthew 3:17, show merely that Christ is God’s Son, not that he is inferior (in fact, John 5:18 shows that being God’s Son is being equal to God).

The beast and it’s image and the mark are all symbolic. Could the fire and suffering be symbolic too?
Rev 20:10 shows other symbolic entities in the lake of fire. And Rev. 20:14 says: death and ‘Hell’ (greek hades) are thrown in there too. Can hell be cast into hell?
Much of revelation is symbolic.
We know the soul dies (Ezekiel 18:4), the wages of sin is death (not torture) (Rom. 6:23)
at death we are aquitted of our sins (Rom. 6:7), and both good and bad will be resurected. (Acts 24:15). All contradicting the teaching of hellfire.

This is an “everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41). Jesus tells his listeners of Lazarus and the rich man, where the rich man dies, and is “existing in torment . . . he sees . . . calls out . . . ‘I am in anguish in this blazing fire’” (Luke 16:19-31). As a further illustration, Jesus stated that hell is likened to Gehenna. This “Valley of Hinnom” was located southeast of Jerusalem, and was used as a garbage dump where trash and waste were continuously burned day and night in a large fire. Jesus informs the listeners that hell is like this, “where the maggot does not die, and fire is not put out” (Mark 9:42-48). It is the place where the wicked are sent, and from this “everlasting fire” (Matt. 18:8) will come “weeping and the gnashing of teeth” (Matt. 8:12). Now if hell were “a place of rest in hope” as the WTS teaches, then it is odd that Jesus would choose such contradictory illustrations to convey this. Lastly, Revelation 20 calls hell a “pool of fire . . . [where] they will be tormented day and night, forever and ever”—all who are not in the book of life. So, if one’s name is in the book of life, one enters heaven (Rev. 21:27). If it not in the book, then a literal hell awaits.

And logically, if there is a literal place of fire and torture, how does that fit with 1 John 4:8. “God is love.” We are made in God’s image, what would you think of someone who allows torture as a form of punishment, especially eternally? There must be people who have been there - suffering for thousands of years because of a few decades of sin. Yuck

So everlasting punishment is a myth and a lie invented by Satan is a myth iteself, un supported by the bible. Interesting interpretation though .

As a Jehovah Witness how do you reconcile with this, the contradictions you find as you find your own interpretations?

Thanks for you reply. i had better answer the rest in another post.

Great! I will be waiting!

 

[Regardless]

Good.

Great! I will be waiting!

Sorry mate. I have replied twice with a big speel, and can’t get through.

Testing… 1, 2, 3

 

[Abeyta85]

Likewise… I’ve shown every verse you have given me,and how it is on the contrary.

Good talking to you my friend, Let me know anytime again if you would like to have another chat, I would love to do this again!

Seems you do know a good deal amount, yet its very twisted for your own interpretation, well the Watchtowers at least.

“I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge” (Rom. 10:2)

God Bless my friend, seek truth, Seek the Lord Jesus Christ! [SIGN] God Bless![/SIGN]

 

[Regardless]

Trying again. have saved it incase…

Lets talk about the NWT, lets see… Who wrote translated the NWT? The translation was made by an “anonymous” committee? Well yes for a time. Why wouldn’t they tell us who translated the NWT?
…
If I were to make you a rocket spaceship, and I have minimal (Self Taught) training, would you take it for a spin? Yea I didn’t think so, so why would you trust a bible written by 5 men who had no credentials?

Good analogy. I would be sceptical until it had been proved.
If some unbiased professionals examined it and said: “This is very good.” That would be a start. If I examined parts I could understand and found them as good or superior to other ships that would help also. If the critics of the ship were all from the competition and were desperate to discredit the builders, who had shown them up in the past - interesting.
I would probably wait to see the results, and would continue using other services aswell. Ha.

The NWT also translates the Greek word kurios (“Lord”) as “Jehovah” dozens of times in the NT, despite the fact that the word “Jehovah” is never used by any NT author. It should also be asked why the NWT does not translate kurios as “Jehovah” in Romans 10:9, 1 Corinthians 12:3, Philippians 2:11, 2 Thessalonians 2:1, and Revelation 22:21. If it did translate kyrios consistently, then Jesus would be Jehovah!

The Apendix 1 at the back of the NWT explains the reasons for this. I won’t repeat it all here.
Briefly – I’m sure you know the divine name YHWH (Jehovah in English) occurs thousands of times in the Hebrew scriptures (OT) A superstition among the Jews in the first century meant they no longer pronounced it, and eventually replaced it with titles. Often “Lord”. Most modern translations follow suit.
(The KJT had “Jehovah” 4 times. The New King James has taken it out altogether.)
In the greek, evidence is sketchy. It appears in the greek sptuaignt, so the early greek Christians knew and read it. But how often was it in the greek scriptures? We can’t tell.
The NWT has included it 237 times, with a couple of exceptions, this is where the text directly quotes the Hebrew scriptures where it occurred. Example: Rom. 10:13. “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved”. We would assume this means Jesus. But Paul is a quoting from Joel 2:32, where it says: “the name of YHWH” (Jehovah)

The professor I read and mentioned earlier (Beduhn) is not convinced on this one. After saying the NWT was best or best equal in the passages he considered, he said he felt adding Jehovah where the evidence is debatable was as bad as replacing it with Lord where other translations know YHWH occurred. (At least this proves he is not a JW in disguise)

So I am in two minds on that one. Perhaps more evidence for or against will surface in time.

…
God Bless!

I read the Vatican instructed in June 2008 “The name of God … is neither to be used or pronounced.” Clearly wanting to eliminate the use of God’s name. What is your opinion on that?

 

[Regardless]

…
“I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge” (Rom. 10:2)
…
God Bless my friend, seek truth, Seek the Lord Jesus Christ! [SIGN] God Bless![/SIGN]

ha, Good quote. Amen!
Nice talking to you. Thanks for keeping me on my toes.

 

[Abeyta85]

Trying again. have saved it incase…

(Buzzer)
Wrong, nice try though!
I thought you were done? Well… I am glad you decided to continue! Lets dig in!

Good analogy. I would be sceptical until it had been proved.
If some unbiased professionals examined it and said: “This is very good.” That would be a start. If I examined parts I could understand and found them as good or superior to other ships that would help also. If the critics of the ship were all from the competition and were desperate to discredit the builders, who had shown them up in the past - interesting.
I would probably wait to see the results, and would continue using other services aswell. Ha.

Unfortunately I am skeptical too, 5 men who had no business translating a bible, I am glad we can agree!

The Apendix 1 at the back of the NWT explains the reasons for this. I won’t repeat it all here.
Briefly – I’m sure you know the divine name YHWH (Jehovah in English) occurs thousands of times in the Hebrew scriptures (OT) A superstition among the Jews in the first century meant they no longer pronounced it, and eventually replaced it with titles. Often “Lord”. Most modern translations follow suit.
(The KJT had “Jehovah” 4 times. The New King James has taken it out altogether.)
In the greek, evidence is sketchy. It appears in the greek sptuaignt, so the early greek Christians knew and read it. But how often was it in the greek scriptures? We can’t tell.
The NWT has included it 237 times, with a couple of exceptions, this is where the text directly quotes the Hebrew scriptures where it occurred. Example: Rom. 10:13. “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved”. We would assume this means Jesus. But Paul is a quoting from Joel 2:32, where it says: “the name of YHWH” (Jehovah)

I am sorry my friend, you have a good understanding, but you are not refuting anything here. You keep trying to give me “reasons”, but you can’t change something and criticize another. That’s called being a hypocrite.

One more time… kurios is Lord as written in the NT. Period.

The professor I read and mentioned earlier (Beduhn) is not convinced on this one. After saying the NWT was best or best equal in the passages he considered, he said he felt adding Jehovah where the evidence is debatable was as bad as replacing it with Lord where other translations know YHWH occurred. (At least this proves he is not a JW in disguise)

Your professor might want to mention early Christians never used the word YHWH because they were unsure of how to pronounce it. Instead Lord was used and written in the NT. We have continued to do so to this day.

So I am in two minds on that one. Perhaps more evidence for or against will surface in time.

More and less

I read the Vatican instructed in June 2008 “The name of God … is neither to be used or pronounced.” Clearly wanting to eliminate the use of God’s name. What is your opinion on that?

For one thing, no one knows for sure how to pronounce YHWH. YHWH, are the four consonants of the ancient Hebrew name for God Himself correct? It is Jewish practice to never pronounce the four-letter name of God. And according to the Vatican, early Christians did not pronounce the four-letter name either.

But as time went on, Christians adopted various names for God. Large groups of Christians made something of the four letters – the name “Yahweh.” Others refrained from translating the letters and used translations of “Lord” (Adonai, Kyrios, and so on).

Refraining from pronouncing God’s name is, according to the Vatican, an “expression of the infinite greatness and majesty of God.”

Hmm… So Jehovah is a best guess at that… a Guess! I am sure GOD Appreciates you mis-pronouncing his name everyday.

Ah see… imagine when everything is put in contrast.

How do you disprove Catholicism? Take something out of contrast and try to use it again them.

How do you disprove Jehovah Witnesses? History.

As a Jehovah Witness, how do reconcile with doctrine changes? A true faith remains consistent on doctrine… Correct?

So explain…

"To worship Christ in any form cannot be wrong … " (WT, 3-1880, 83).

“There could be nothing against our consciences in going into the army” (WT, 4-15-1903, 120)

"We may as well join in with the civilized world in celebrating the grand event [Christmas]

“Everyone in America should take pleasure in displaying the American flag” (WT Reprints, 5-15-1917, 6068).

and the list goes on and on. Even Charles Russell the founder of your Sect, believed in these…

I am eagerly awaiting your reply my friend, I am glad you are on your toes, I do what I can

[SIGN]Thank you, God Bless![/SIGN]

 

[Regardless]

For one thing, no one knows for sure how to pronounce YHWH. YHWH, are the four consonants of the ancient Hebrew name for God Himself correct? …
Hmm… So Jehovah is a best guess at that… a Guess! I am sure GOD Appreciates you mis-pronouncing his name everyday.

Jesus isn’t how you pronounce the name of the son of God (or God the son as you believe). In Hebrew it is more like: Yeshua or Joshua.
What would you think if the NWT had cut his name out of the Bible and replace it with a title?

As a Jehovah Witness, how do reconcile with doctrine changes? A true faith remains consistent on doctrine… Correct?

So explain…

… (list of statements in WT before 1917 no longer taught by JW’s - Regardless) …

I am eagerly awaiting your reply my friend, I am glad you are on your toes, I do what I can

[SIGN]Thank you, God Bless![/SIGN]

I have given this some thought over the years.

And I could add some to the list:

• It wasn’t until 1935 we understood who the great crowd of Revelation 7 was. The WT probably explained it as another class in heaven several times before that date.
• Russel was into the Pyramids – and thought they somehow had something to do with chronology for many years.
• And of course they figured 1914 and the end of the gentile times was probably when they would all be taken to heaven… Didn’t imagine the massive work still to be done!

**So… What is your point here? ** (so I understand how to reply)

You must mean either:
1 – The witnesses should have known everything 100% from day one. And never made a mistake.

2 – If the evidence became apparent that some aspect of their belief was wrong, they should have stubbornly stayed believing it regardless.

Which do you think? 1 or 2?

 

[Abeyta85]

Jesus isn’t how you pronounce the name of the son of God (or God the son as you believe). In Hebrew it is more like: Yeshua or Joshua.
What would you think if the NWT had cut his name out of the Bible and replace it with a title?

I have given this some thought over the years.

And I could add some to the list:

• It wasn’t until 1935 we understood who the great crowd of Revelation 7 was. The WT probably explained it as another class in heaven several times before that date.
• Russel was into the Pyramids – and thought they somehow had something to do with chronology for many years.
• And of course they figured 1914 and the end of the gentile times was probably when they would all be taken to heaven… Didn’t imagine the massive work still to be done!

**So… What is your point here? ** (so I understand how to reply)

You must mean either:
1 – The witnesses should have known everything 100% from day one. And never made a mistake.

2 – If the evidence became apparent that some aspect of their belief was wrong, they should have stubbornly stayed believing it regardless.

Which do you think? 1 or 2?

I pick 3.

It’s interesting that the truth seems to change on JW Doctrine. What was truth 10 years ago, 50 years ago, may not be truth now. In fact we can see this with Rutherford said that in 1925 Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the prophets would return to Earth, and for them he prepared a mansion named Beth Sarim in San Diego, California. He moved into this mansion (where he died in 1942) and bought an automobile with which to drive the resurrected patriarchs around. The Watch Tower Society quietly sold Beth Sarim years later to cover up an embarrassing moment in their history, namely another failed prophecy.

At an international convention held at Cedar Point, Ohio, in September 1922, a new emphasis was made on house-to-house preaching.[41] Significant changes in doctrine were made under Rutherford’s leadership, including the 1918 announcement that Jewish patriarchs (such as Abraham and Isaac) would be resurrected in 1925, marking the beginning of Christ’s thousand-year reign.[42][43] Failed expectations for 1925, coupled with other doctrinal changes, resulted in a significant reduction in attendance of the Bible Students’ yearly Memorial, from 90,434 in 1925[44] to 17,380 in 1928.[45][46] In 1932 they abandoned the teaching that the Jews continued to hold a special role in the divine plan.[47][48][49] By 1933, the timing of the beginning of Christ’s presence (Greek: parousía), his enthronement as king, and the start of the “last days”, were each moved to 1914.[42][50][51][52] In 1932, a separate class of members was identified who would live in a paradise restored on earth; from 1935, new converts to the movement were considered part of that class. Previously, membership was generally composed of those who believed they would be resurrected to live in heaven to rule over earth with Christ.[53]

(Wiki)
As their interpretations of scripture developed, Witness publications taught that saluting national flags and singing the national anthem are forms of idolatry.[54] In Germany, Jehovah’s Witnesses came under persecution, with as many as 5000 sent to concentration camps for their refusal to perform the Nazi salute or participate in the German war effort.[55][56] Witnesses experienced mob violence in the United States, and their activities were banned in Canada and Australia because of their refusal to accept military service.[57][58][59] Witnesses also refused alternative civilian service provided for conscientious objectors, until 1996 when it was deemed a “conscience matter”.[60][61]

Thus I will never become a JW, I am home, with the the Church Jesus Christ founded.

Last comment is yours my friend, I have really enjoyed speaking with you! God Bless!

 

[Big_Dummy]

use your paper shreeder or burn it so it does not fall into the wrong hands.

 

[Abeyta85]

use your paper shreeder or burn it so it does not fall into the wrong hands.

 

[Regardless]

I pick 3.

It’s interesting that the truth seems to change on JW Doctrine. What was truth 10 years ago, 50 years ago, may not be truth now. …
… Significant changes in doctrine were made under Rutherford’s leadership,… In 1932, a separate class of members was identified who would live in a paradise restored on earth; …

Ok. I think number 3 sounds much like option one.
“JW’s should have known everything from day one, and therefore never needed to change what they teach.”
But from the start the Bible students (later Jehovah’s Witnesses) were founded on changing what they perceived was not the truth! Ones like Russel and his companions saw that the trinity and hellfire and predestination, (which they had been brought up believing) was not in line with the Bible. What should they do? Stay teaching what they could see was not the truth? Or change?
(Has the Catholic church never changed a doctrine or an understanding in all its councils and things. I can think of several.)
Look at the past followers of Jehovah. Jesus apostles realised there was much they did not understand in their time. At Acts 1:6 we see they were still expecting the Kingdom to be an earthly one in Israel! Earlier when approaching Jerusalem with Jesus they were “expecting the Kingdom to reveal itself immediately.”

On doctrines too: Consider Peter when Cornelius became a Christian. (Acts 10) They realised it wasn’t just the Jews anymore! Gentiles were to be accepted as equals! Massive change!
Then in Acts 15 we find the circumcision issue. “Do we stay keeping the mosaic law?” When the evidence was considered: CHANGE!

Is this evidence the early Christians were not God’s people?. ( They had wrong ideas that had to be corrected when the time was right after all) No. They were humble men who changed when they realised they were not in line. Jesus had told them they had much still to learn (John 16:12)
Did this rule them out as Jehovah’s servants? Far from it! He used them to do the preaching work throughout the known world!
Jesus quoted Daniel as a prophet, and he was inspired to write that there would be a huge increase in knowledge in the “time of the end” . (Daniel 12:4)
To increase in knowledge, we have to put aside previous wrong understandings. Like the apostles did. And what a parallel. It is the JW’s Jehovah is using to do the preaching work Jesus prophecied in Matt 24:14. In the time of the end.

As their interpretations of scripture developed, Witness publications taught that saluting national flags and singing the national anthem are forms of idolatry.[54] In Germany, Jehovah’s Witnesses came under persecution, with as many as 5000 sent to concentration camps for their refusal to perform the Nazi salute or participate in the German war effort.[55][56] Witnesses experienced mob violence in the United States,…
…
Last comment is yours my friend, I have really enjoyed speaking with you! God Bless!

At John 13:34, 35 Jesus didn’t say perfection was the mark of true Christians. Love was.
And your above comments remind me I didn’t answer a question you raised in a previous post.
-How do you disprove Catholicism?.- You have tried to disprove JW’s. I will answer your question if you don’t mind.

 

[Abeyta85]

Ok. I think number 3 sounds much like option one.
“JW’s should have known everything from day one, and therefore never needed to change what they teach.”
But from the start the Bible students (later Jehovah’s Witnesses) were founded on changing what they perceived was not the truth! Ones like Russel and his companions saw that the trinity and hellfire and predestination, (which they had been brought up believing) was not in line with the Bible. What should they do? Stay teaching what they could see was not the truth? Or change?
(Has the Catholic church never changed a doctrine or an understanding in all its councils and things. I can think of several.)
Look at the past followers of Jehovah. Jesus apostles realised there was much they did not understand in their time. At Acts 1:6 we see they were still expecting the Kingdom to be an earthly one in Israel! Earlier when approaching Jerusalem with Jesus they were “expecting the Kingdom to reveal itself immediately.”

On doctrines too: Consider Peter when Cornelius became a Christian. (Acts 10) They realised it wasn’t just the Jews anymore! Gentiles were to be accepted as equals! Massive change!
Then in Acts 15 we find the circumcision issue. “Do we stay keeping the mosaic law?” When the evidence was considered: CHANGE!

Is this evidence the early Christians were not God’s people?. ( They had wrong ideas that had to be corrected when the time was right after all) No. They were humble men who changed when they realised they were not in line. Jesus had told them they had much still to learn (John 16:12)
Did this rule them out as Jehovah’s servants? Far from it! He used them to do the preaching work throughout the known world!
Jesus quoted Daniel as a prophet, and he was inspired to write that there would be a huge increase in knowledge in the “time of the end” . (Daniel 12:4)
To increase in knowledge, we have to put aside previous wrong understandings. Like the apostles did. And what a parallel. It is the JW’s Jehovah is using to do the preaching work Jesus prophecied in Matt 24:14. In the time of the end.

At John 13:34, 35 Jesus didn’t say perfection was the mark of true Christians. Love was.
And your above comments remind me I didn’t answer a question you raised in a previous post.​

How do you disprove Catholicism?.- You have tried(Did) to disprove JW’s. I will answer your question if you don’t mind.

Oh do tell!

 

[Abeyta85]

Ok. I think number 3 sounds much like option one.
“JW’s should have known everything from day one, and therefore never needed to change what they teach.”
But from the start the Bible students (later Jehovah’s Witnesses) were founded on changing what they perceived was not the truth! Ones like Russel and his companions saw that the trinity and hellfire and predestination, (which they had been brought up believing) was not in line with the Bible. What should they do? Stay teaching what they could see was not the truth? Or change?
(Has the Catholic church never changed a doctrine or an understanding in all its councils and things. I can think of several.)
Look at the past followers of Jehovah. Jesus apostles realised there was much they did not understand in their time. At Acts 1:6 we see they were still expecting the Kingdom to be an earthly one in Israel! Earlier when approaching Jerusalem with Jesus they were “expecting the Kingdom to reveal itself immediately.”

On doctrines too: Consider Peter when Cornelius became a Christian. (Acts 10) They realised it wasn’t just the Jews anymore! Gentiles were to be accepted as equals! Massive change!
Then in Acts 15 we find the circumcision issue. “Do we stay keeping the mosaic law?” When the evidence was considered: CHANGE!

Is this evidence the early Christians were not God’s people?. ( They had wrong ideas that had to be corrected when the time was right after all) No. They were humble men who changed when they realised they were not in line. Jesus had told them they had much still to learn (John 16:12)
Did this rule them out as Jehovah’s servants? Far from it! He used them to do the preaching work throughout the known world!
Jesus quoted Daniel as a prophet, and he was inspired to write that there would be a huge increase in knowledge in the “time of the end” . (Daniel 12:4)
To increase in knowledge, we have to put aside previous wrong understandings. Like the apostles did. And what a parallel. It is the JW’s Jehovah is using to do the preaching work Jesus prophecied in Matt 24:14. In the time of the end.

At John 13:34, 35 Jesus didn’t say perfection was the mark of true Christians. Love was.
And your above comments remind me I didn’t answer a question you raised in a previous post.
-How do you disprove Catholicism?.- You have tried to disprove JW’s. I will answer your question if you don’t mind.

Oh and one more thing…

In 1910 Russell wrote, "If anyone lays the Scripture Studies [short for a 7-volume WTS publication entitled Studies in the Scriptures, hereafter abbreviated as Studies] aside, even after he has used them, after he has become familiar with them, after he has read them for ten years—if he lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible alone, though he has understood the Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within two years he goes into darkness. On the other hand, if he had merely read the Scripture Studies with their references and had not read a page of the Bible, as such, he will be in the light at the end of two years . . . " (WT Reprints, 9-15-1910, 4685). The WTS maintains that it is God’s reliable mouthpiece to the nations, and it claims to be God’s inspired prophet (WT, 4-1-1972, 197)—and yet its prophecies have repeatedly proven to be false. The only conclusion to be drawn is that the WTS is to be rejected as a false prophet.

Among other things, the WTS predicted the following:
1889 "The ‘battle of the great day of God almighty’ (Rev 16:14) which will end in AD 1914 . . . " (Studies, Vol. 2, 1908 edition, 101).
1891 “With the end of AD 1914, what God calls Babylon, and what men call Christendom, will have passed away, as already shown from prophecy” (Studies, Vol. 3, 153).
1894 “The end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble” (WT Reprints, 1-1-1894, 1605 and 1677).
1897 “Our Lord is now present, since October 1874 AD” (Studies, Vol. 4, 1897 edition, 621).
1916 “The six great 1000 year days beginning with Adam are ended, and that the great 7th day, the 1000 years of Christ’s reign began in 1873” (Studies, Vol. 2, p. 2 of foreword).
1917 “Scriptures . . . prove that the Lord’s Second Advent occurred in the fall of 1874” (Studies, Vol. 7, 68).
1918 “Therefore, we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the faithful prophets of old” (Millions Now Living Will Never Die, 89).
1922 “The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the scriptures than 1914” (WT, 9-1-1922, 262).
1923 “1925 is definitely settled by the scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith than Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge” (WT, 4-1-1923, 106).
1925 “The year of 1925 is here. . . . Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year” (WT, 1-1-1925, 3).
1931 “There was a measure of disappointment on the part of Jehovah’s faithful ones on earth concerning the dates 1914, 1918, & 1925 . . . and they also learned to quit fixing dates” (Vindication, 388, 389).
1939 “The disaster of Armageddon is just ahead” (Salvation, 361).
1941 “Armageddon is surely near . . . soon . . . within a few years” (Children, 10).
1946 “Armageddon . . . should come sometime before 1972” (They Have Found a Faith, 44).
1966 “Six thousand years from man’s creation will end in 1975, and the seventh period of a thousand years of human history will begin in the fall of 1975 C.E” (Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God, 29).
1968 “The end of the six thousand years of man’s history in the fall of 1975 is not tentative, but is accepted as a certain date” (WT, 1-1-1968, 271).

Thanks for the chat!

 

[MerryCatholic]

In 1989 he said: “This work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. ...** I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain.**”

Don’t just assume we must have wickedly changed God’s word to back up our beliefs.

All the best in your studies.

your inaccurate. the witnesses have changed their bible to suit their beliefs. john 1.1 is a prime example of that. thomas said to Christ, my Lord, and my God! Jesus Christ said He’d raise himself up under His own power. If he was not God he could not do that. michael the arch angel cannot forgive sins, Jesus can and does.watchtower society falsely predicted the “end of the system of things” in 1975. also falsely stated in their own magazines that there’d be some left alive to see the Great Tribulation. that did not happen. the elect as you call them have mostly passed away now, and the GT is not here at all.
Jesus said, no man knows the hour or the day when the end will come. NO MAN.
not even your governing body knows. they are not God. nor do they speak for God.

furthermore, life is sacred to God. that means that the society will be held accountable to God for the thousands upon thousands who died without a blood transfusion. died for the society, not for God. babies who through no voice of their own cannot protect themselves, and die without a transfusion, why? because their parents chose to withold a life saving transfusion that could have saved the childs life. transfused blood does not enter the stomach to be consumed as food. it goes through the veins and does not enter the stomach therefore it is not consumed as food. transfusions were not invented 2000 years ago therefore your society cannot state it is immoral or a soul can be annhilated forever for taking one. your society also uses brainwashing tactics to keep members in line.
your not even allowed to question what the society teaches.that is mind control.

further proof that people go to heaven, Jesus said to the man on the cross beside him, today you will be with me in paradise. that man died before Christ was resurrected. or ascended into heaven. so you know full well what that means.

people should seriously not get involved with the witnesses. they have blasphemed against Jesus, denied He is God, and denied his divinity. Christ said, you deny me, you deny Him who sent me. They do not speak for God, and made multiple false prophecies
regarding the end of the world. do not get involved with this organization. walk away, and burn that “bible” they call the “truth”.

 

[Regardless]

…
How do you disprove Catholicism? Take something out of contrast and try to use it again them.

How do you disprove Jehovah Witnesses? History.
…
[SIGN]Thank you, God Bless![/SIGN]

In answering this question I may offend some. I apologise. That is not my intention.

Ironically –(after what I have just had to defend) it is History, and the changes from true Christianity that makes me realise the CC is not Jehovah’s organisation on earth today.
You know we understand from the Bible that manyl doctrines of the CC are not taught there.
Where did these teaching come from? Jesus taught his followers to be no part of the world. Like he was. (John 17:16) But that is hard. So in the centuries that followed Jesus, we see such things as Greek philosophy and pagan teaching creeping into or merging with the Christian congregations.
Soon there were many different factions teaching different things.
Seeking religious harmony for political reasons, Emperor Constantine quickly crushed any dissenting voices, not on the grounds of doctrinal truth, but on the basis of majority acceptance. The profound dogmatic differences within the badly divided “Christian” church gave him the opportunity to intervene as a “God-sent” mediator.
As apostate Christianity came into favor with the political government, it became more and more a part of this world, of this secular system, and drifted away from the teachings of Jesus Christ. (John 15:19; Revelation 17:1, 2) As a result, there was a fusion of “Christianity” with false doctrines and practices—the Trinity, immortality of the soul, hellfire, purgatory, prayers for the dead, use of rosaries, icons, images, and the like.—Compare 2 Corinthians 6:14-18.

No wonder Jehovah is not using them to do the preaching work today.

 

[Regardless]

Oh and one more thing…

Thanks for the chat!

Yeah, yeah. Another list of changes and updates from an anti-witness website.
have answered why already.

 

[Catholic_Ninja]

All i can say is that it’s still a bible and therefore still the word of God. It should still be treated with respect and burned or buried just like any other bible. (Just like you would do with a KJV or NIV, even if it is incomplete or inaccurate it is still the word of God and should be treated accordingly)

just my :twocents:

 

[Regardless]

(Wiki)
As their interpretations of scripture developed, Witness publications taught that saluting national flags and singing the national anthem are forms of idolatry.[54] In Germany, Jehovah’s Witnesses came under persecution, with as many as 5000 sent to concentration camps for their refusal to perform the Nazi salute or participate in the German war effort.[55][56]

Thus I will never become a JW, I am home, with the the Church Jesus Christ founded.
…God Bless!

A second area is highlighted in Matt 7:13-23. Jesus said you would be able to tell the difference between true and false religion by it’s fruits. (what it produces and does)
I could get into crusades and inquisitions and percecution of Bible translators… but more recent history proves the point better.
Abeyta85 quoted wikipedia on changes the JW’s made: (above)

What fruitage did the Catholic church show in this defining moment in history?
I am sure you all agree: It was a no-brainer that the Nazi idiology was totally contrary to the teachings of Christ. They were racist, they detested the weak, and brutality. Compared to love, compassion and kindness.

Sometimes Catholics call the WT anti-catholic. The Wt has never lied in what it shows about the CC. In fact, after reading one article where the churches conduct in WW2 was mentioned, I did some research, and I found the WT is very restrained in what it says.

We all know the Church signed a concordat with the Nazis a few months after they took total power. Hitler was delighted, since this gave him international recognition from the highest moral power.
What I only recently learned from wikipedia blew me away. Indulge me a minute and imagine you were a good Catholic in germany in the early 1930’s.

Imagine you were there:
You are alarmed by what you can clearly see is the anti-christian rise of Fascism, so you vote for the Catholic centre party. A political force to appose Hitler. (political party of catholics despite Jesus words in John 14:19) The nazis only get 30% of the votes. No governemnt.
But then, VonPapen (a papal knight) gets Hitler appointed Chancellor! (even after some of Papens own collegues have been murdered by the Nazis) Hitler moves for the “enabling act” where the chancellor can change laws without parliaments support (be a dictator)

But fortunately they need two-thirds of the votes. They only have one third. The liberals say: “No way!’ But suddenly, to your horror, the Catholic Centre party votes in favour!. Hitler becomes dictator.
What now? Don’t worry, the Vatican is sending Pacellii (future pope) to discuss things with the Nazis. Most of the Nazi leaders are Catholic, surely this will sort it out. The vatican will tell them to pull their head in!
The newspaper in July 1933 declares a concordat has been signed. One point has oath of allegiance by Bishops to include: I swear and vow to honor the constitutional government and to make my clergy honor it; (Article 16)

So the years pass and your Jehovah’s witness neighbour gets arrested because he won’t salute “Heil Hitler” because he thinks it is worship. Jews are persecuted and assaulted. The Nazi government starts arming for war. You get a letter in the post ordering you to report for military service., You go to your priest for advice.

• “Father, Look at this letter. I know Jesus taught, “love your neighbour,” and “He who lives by the sword dies by the sword.” I don’t want to be put in a position where I might kill a fellow human! What shall I do?”
• “My son, God wants you to serve you country. Do as the government says. Heil Hitler.”

War breaks out. Of the three men you kill in Poland, on examining their bodies you find they are all fellow catholics. Blessed by the church as you have been blessed.
You hear your JW neighbour is in a Mauthausen concentration camp for refusing to fight for the Nazis.

Scary stuff. I’m sorry if these facts offend. I was amazed.

My conclusion from what I have learned is:
If the Devil was involved in the rise of Hitler, he used the Catholic church as an excellent tool bring it about.

If you want to see why the JW’s were persecuted try en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jehovah’s_Witnesses_in_Nazi_Germany
They were unique as the only religin that had it’s own badge, and the only group who were there voluntarily. The link has a copy of the statement they could sign to be relased at any time. They refused to worship the state or kill people.
“By their fruits you will know them.” Jesus Christ - Matt 7:16.