Scripture verses JWs have problems with?

[PRmerger]

Reply,

Hello,

My brother was a Catholic for over 20 years and is now a JW. I asked him why? When he was a teenager, he studied Hebrew, Greek (classical and koine), ancient history and Greek philosophy and metaphysics. He did 3 years intensive reseach and came to the conclusion, ever before he ever met with JW’s, that many of the teachings, customs, celebrations and dogmas of the RCC and Protestant churches were based, not on scripture, but on extra-biblical matters!

He has had discussions with rabbis, priests, vicars etc and none of them seem to be able to touch him, as he, at will can quote the apologists, church fathers (I wish I had his memory) scripture and historical sources at will and has seemed to produce empirical indisputable evidence that what he says on certain subjects is true; for example, he says that the Triune godhead “substance sharing” (to quote him) is based on the metaphysics of a Greek philosopher called Parmenides, on whom, Plato based his metaphysical and philosophical ideas on and later on the Neo-Platonic philosophers Plotinus, Porphyry… gave the Catholic church a polished version of and that the whole church is 99% Greek in thought and only 1% Christian in thought and no vicar or priest seems to be able to hold their own against him, he seems to be like a surgeon’s scalpel. I told him about some of the way some on here answer the average JW, who in the main, are not apologists and when I told him about some of the Catholic replies to JW’s, he just laughed and laughed and said “it figures”!

Does anyone have any suggestions, as to how I can answer him, any questions, that I can put to him? Please drop me an e-mail, as I am out most of the time and can access my emails from an internet cafe!

Many thanks!

I don’t know if you can read this now, hippo, but your brother would be correct when he says that the teachings of Christianity are not extracted from the Scriptures.

The Christian faith was whole and entire before a single word of the NT was ever put to writ. We received the faith, deposited once for all and delivered TO THE CHURCH, from the mouths of the Apostles and handed on through the paradosis.

Other Christian denominations may not be able to respond to your brother’s objections, but informed Catholics certainly can! The Catholic Church is not a “bible-based” religion, and thus his objection to its dogmas not being “based” on Scripture are correct.

Scripture reflects the doctrines and teachings of the Church, rather than the Church forming its doctrines from the text.

 

[PRmerger]

I do not mean to be “disingenuous” by claiming I have no ‘creed’…as stated before…reciting a “creed” does not indicate one lives in Truth…it merely means…one can recite a creedal statement.

Fair enough, friend.

So by saying you are “noncreedal” do you really mean that you don’t recite creeds, but that you certainly have one?

For what is a creed except a profession of what “I believe”? Credo–“I believe” in Latin.

 

[jericho777]

And that’s because you are reading the Scriptures through the lens of Christianity.

Someone else, say, someone stranded on a desert island who had never been exposed to Christianity, might not ever conclude that Jesus is God Incarnate through reading the Bible alone.

Actually I was trying to be impartial in my beleifs as to there being scriptural evidence to support the Deity of Christ.

Jesus is called God in the scriptures. It is the Holy Spirit who gives one the ability to beleive where ever they are.

 

[PRmerger]

Actually I was trying to be impartial in my beleifs as to there being scriptural evidence to support the Deity of Christ.

Jesus is called God in the scriptures. It is the Holy Spirit who gives one the ability to beleive where ever they are.

And I agree with you!

But this is because you understand the Scriptures through Tradition.

Someone on a desert island, someone who’s a Muslim, someone who reads only the Bible–and nothing else–can come to a very different conclusion.

 

[jericho777]

And I agree with you!

But this is because you understand the Scriptures through Tradition.

Someone on a desert island, someone who’s a Muslim, someone who reads only the Bible–and nothing else–can come to a very different conclusion.

Many people in cultures who are hostile to Christ or have no knowledge of who Jesus is read the bible and are transformed by it. Likewise many people go to church their whole life and hear the truth and totally reject it. This tells me there is something other than just reading the bible that brings one to faith.

 

[PRmerger]

Many people in cultures who are hostile to Christ or have no knowledge of who Jesus is read the bible and are transformed by it. Likewise many people go to church their whole life and hear the truth and totally reject it. This tells me there is something other than just reading the bible that brings one to faith.

*Exactly!! * :clapping:

So when a JW says that someone living on a deserted island couldn’t extract the deity of Christ from the words of Scripture the response is, “This is a false criterion. We don’t use the Bible alone to come to an understanding of the divinity of Christ.”

In fact, if you do do this (ha ha! you just made me say “do do” ),and use the Bible alone–nothing else, you come up with all sorts of heresies and weird proclamations that are simply NOT the faith deposited, once for all, to the saints.

 

[jericho777]

*Exactly!! * :clapping:

So when a JW says that someone living on a deserted island couldn’t extract the deity of Christ from the words of Scripture the response is, “This is a false criterion. We don’t use the Bible alone to come to an understanding of the divinity of Christ.”

In fact, if you do do this (ha ha! you just made me say “do do” ),and use the Bible alone–nothing else, you come up with all sorts of heresies and weird proclamations that are simply NOT the faith deposited, once for all, to the saints.

His premis is that scripture does not support the idea or evidence for the Deity of Christ which is not true. There many examples of His Deity. John 1:1, Mat 1:23, John 20:28, Titus 2:13, Is 9:6, John 8:58, Ron 9:5 and 2Peter 1:1. There are others but you ger the point.

This truth is relevent anywhere in the universe you go. Whether you beleive it or not is a different subject.

BTW the " there is something other than just reading the bible that brings one to faith." comment should have been better explained by saying it is the work of the Holy Spirit that reveals His truth leading us to saving faith.

Hope this explains it better.

 

[Publisher]

Fair enough, friend.

So by saying you are “noncreedal” do you really mean that you don’t recite creeds, but that you certainly have one?

For what is a creed except a profession of what “I believe”? Credo–“I believe” in Latin.

I do have beliefs that I embrace and seek to live them and incorporate them withing my life. They are my “sacred story” which I use to “frame” Truth…they are not Truth itself…Truth is something we live…not necessarily something we profess in creedal statements…

I dare say that a good many who attend houses of worship and recite the Creed many faith communities…including yours…display no evidence in their lives that what they “profess…they possess.” I would rather my life speak to what I beleive…than use words that have no evidence in my life behind them.

 

[Holly3278]

Personally, I hope that Jehovah’s Witnesses never come to my door unless I am well studied up on their religion and such which I am ashamed to say, I am not. I would not know how to defend Catholicism adequately and I don’t want to be unable to give a reason for the hope that is within me as the Bible says.

 

[PRmerger]

His premis is that scripture does not support the idea or evidence for the Deity of Christ which is not true. There many examples of His Deity. John 1:1, Mat 1:23, John 20:28, Titus 2:13, Is 9:6, John 8:58, Ron 9:5 and 2Peter 1:1. There are others but you ger the point.

What about his comment about being on a desert island?

Doesn’t he mean that by using the Scripture alone one could not extract the dogma of the divinity of Christ from the pages of the bible?

This is true, for by using “bible verse recitation”–one person recites his litany of verses and the other person recites her litany–one only goes round and round. And what one gets is…well, bible verse recitation. Not a confirmation of any truth.

This truth is relevent anywhere in the universe you go. Whether you beleive it or not is a different subject.

True. But if one uses the Bible alone one will never come to the same truth.

In fact, we see the fruit of this right now with the tens of thousands of Christian denominations, each claiming their interpretation of the Bible is the correct one.

BTW the " there is something other than just reading the bible that brings one to faith." comment should have been better explained by saying it is the work of the Holy Spirit that reveals His truth leading us to saving faith.

Hope this explains it better.

All Christians claim to be inspired by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation–yet this Holy Spirit has produced such radically different doctrines that it simply cannot be the HS that is the source of this chaos and confusion.

 

[PRmerger]

I do have beliefs that I embrace and seek to live them and incorporate them withing my life. They are my “sacred story” which I use to “frame” Truth…they are not Truth itself…Truth is something we live…not necessarily something we profess in creedal statements…

And could not the white supremacist claim the same thing? And would you say that he is right in following his “sacred story”?

I dare say that a good many who attend houses of worship and recite the Creed many faith communities…including yours…display no evidence in their lives that what they “profess…they possess.”

'Tis true, this. :sad_yes:

I would rather my life speak to what I beleive…than use words that have no evidence in my life behind them.

Again, this is true. And this is the Catholic way as well.

But each and every time you profess what you believe you are professing a creed.
And when you profess “Credo” or “I believe” you are rejecting a set of beliefs as well.

Nothing wrong with this, of course!

 

[jericho777]

What about his comment about being on a desert island?

Doesn’t he mean that by using the Scripture alone one could not extract the dogma of the divinity of Christ from the pages of the bible?

This is true, for by using “bible verse recitation”–one person recites his litany of verses and the other person recites her litany–one only goes round and round. And what one gets is…well, bible verse recitation. Not a confirmation of any truth.

True. But if one uses the Bible alone one will never come to the same truth.

In fact, we see the fruit of this right now with the tens of thousands of Christian denominations, each claiming their interpretation of the Bible is the correct one.

All Christians claim to be inspired by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation–yet this Holy Spirit has produced such radically different doctrines that it simply cannot be the HS that is the source of this chaos and confusion.

No he was saying there is no scriptural evidence that would suggest the Deity of Christ yet Jesus even declares to be the Son of God making Himself equal to God.

Everything we believe must be substantiated by scripture. First there must be scriptural evidence for an idea then weigh other verses against them to see if the idea is valid. It’s the interpretation of said scripture is where the ideas come into question. Why doesn’t the CC decide between the Augustinian and the Thomist views (Jesuit and Dominican)? They are allowing two different truths to coexist. Also the CC does not interpret or take a position on every verse of scripture.

Do you think God being the author of scripture would hide the truth of His word from the world? He gave His word as instruction for us. That what the word Torah means “instruction”, it’s not esoteric and for just a select few.

Do not try to portray different Christian churches as having different VALUES because they don’t. The many independent churches are united by a set of historic orthodox biblical truths. We may not go to the same church but we are brothers in Christ. There’s a difference.

You all have different catholic churches (rites) but are in communion with each other. It’s a matter of style not substance. Just look at the EO and you, you cannot deny the differences but yet you give communion to each other. And you two are seriously apart on the “truth”.

Was not the Holy Spirit leading Israel yet there were different religious groups claiming different doctrines. How can this be?

 

[PRmerger]

No he was saying there is no scriptural evidence that would suggest the Deity of Christ yet Jesus even declares to be the Son of God making Himself equal to God.

Well, then, he would be wrong.

Everything we believe must be substantiated by scripture.

Scripture verse for this, please. This is a man-made tradition that you’ve succumbed to,
not found in any pages of His Word.

NB: 2 Tim 3:16 does NOT state the above, so please don’t use this. It merely states that Scripture is God’s Word, not that “everything we believe must be substantiated by Scripture”.

 

[PRmerger]

First there must be scriptural evidence for an idea then weigh other verses against them to see if the idea is valid.

Scripture verse for this also, please.

This is another man-made tradition to which you’ve succumbed, jericho. You heard someone say it, who heard someone else say it, who heard his fallible pastor say it, but no one ever read it in a single page of the Bible.

 

[PRmerger]

Why doesn’t the CC decide between the Augustinian and the Thomist views (Jesuit and Dominican)? They are allowing two different truths to coexist.

Please give an example of a truth proposed by the Jesuits that is contradicted by a truth proposed by the Dominicans.

Also, are you conflating Augustinian views with the Jesuits and contrasting that with the Thomistic views and Dominicans? If so, please provide your source. I have not heard that Jesuits are “Augustinian” and Dominicans are “Thomists”.

Also the CC does not interpret or take a position on every verse of scripture.

True.

Do you think God being the author of scripture would hide the truth of His word from the world? He gave His word as instruction for us. That what the word Torah means “instruction”, it’s not esoteric and for just a select few.

This is very Catholic of you to say, jericho!

 

[PRmerger]

Do not try to portray different Christian churches as having different VALUES because they don’t. The many independent churches are united by a set of historic orthodox biblical truths. We may not go to the same church but we are brothers in Christ. There’s a difference.

Can you please provide a list of these “historic orthodox biblical truths” that are believed by all independent churches?

You all have different catholic churches (rites) but are in communion with each other. It’s a matter of style not substance.

Exactly!

Just look at the EO and you, you cannot deny the differences but yet you give communion to each other.

Actually, this is not quite true.

And you two are seriously apart on the “truth”.

This is also not quite true.

Was not the Holy Spirit leading Israel yet there were different religious groups claiming different doctrines. How can this be?

I don’t know about what differing doctrines the Israelites proclaimed, but if there were any the source most certainly was NOT the Holy Spirit, who is not the author of chaos and confusion.

 

[jericho777]

Well, then, he would be wrong.

Scripture verse for this, please. This is a man-made tradition that you’ve succumbed to,
not found in any pages of His Word.

NB: 2 Tim 3:16 does NOT state the above, so please don’t use this. It merely states that Scripture is God’s Word, not that “everything we believe must be substantiated by Scripture”.

Good afternoon PR, If our beliefs do not have to come from scripture than we cannot verify their origins or truth claims and have an ever changing set of truths that are subjective to the leadership. This is what happened in ancient Israel. How many times does Jesus rebuke those falsehoods of the “religious” leaders and satan with the saying “it is written” then uses the written word to assert the truth? He is going back to the authority of the written word because it is verifiable and unchangeable. It is the way He challenged and silenced the false premise of His adversaries. There is power contained in the written word enough to rebuke the enemy.

No but 2 Tim 3:16 does demonstrate the sufficiency (Paul defines it as sufficient) of scripture in the life of the believer. Paul reminds him of the role scriptures played in his faith in Christ. If there was nothing else scripture alone is able to bring saving knowledge.

 

[jericho777]

Scripture verse for this also, please.

This is another man-made tradition to which you’ve succumbed, jericho. You heard someone say it, who heard someone else say it, who heard his fallible pastor say it, but no one ever read it in a single page of the Bible.

Jesus used it against the man made rules of the religeous of His day.

 

[jericho777]

Please give an example of a truth proposed by the Jesuits that is contradicted by a truth proposed by the Dominicans.

Also, are you conflating Augustinian views with the Jesuits and contrasting that with the Thomistic views and Dominicans? If so, please provide your source. I have not heard that Jesuits are “Augustinian” and Dominicans are “Thomists”.

There was a discussion on here about their differing veiws and I thought how ironic it was to have two differing doctrines running concurrently. I don’t fully understand their differences just that there is a difference.

 

[guanophore]

Good afternoon PR, If our beliefs do not have to come from scripture than we cannot verify their origins or truth claims and have an ever changing set of truths that are subjective to the leadership.

People say things like this who do not really believe that God is able to preserve His Word where He places it - in the Church, for instance.

Isa 55:10-11

10 "For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven,
and return not thither but water the earth,
making it bring forth and sprout,
giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater,
11 so shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth;
it shall not return to me empty,
but it shall accomplish that which I purpose,
and prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

People says such things who don’t believe God is able to prosper His Word to perform it.

People who say such things mistakely think that God’s Word is confined to the written page. This is not what the Apostles believed and taught.

They did teach,however, that nothing can contradict what is written. That is why there are no Catholic beliefs that contradict what is written in that fine Catholic collection of books we call the New Testament.

This is what happened in ancient Israel. How many times does Jesus rebuke those falsehoods of the “religious” leaders and satan with the saying “it is written” then uses the written word to assert the truth?

The written Word should most certainly be used to assert the Truth, however, the Truth does not come from that written Word.

John 14:5-6
6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life;

The Truth is in a Person, and that Person is alive and well in His Church.

John 14:5-6
6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life;

He is going back to the authority of the written word because it is verifiable and unchangeable. It is the way He challenged and silenced the false premise of His adversaries. There is power contained in the written word enough to rebuke the enemy.

Indeed, there is such power in the written word. However, I think you will have to agree that there are many ways to interpret that written word, and you would not agree with some of the interpretations that have been invented in the last 500 years. This is why the written word must never be separated from the faith that produced it.

No but 2 Tim 3:16 does demonstrate the sufficiency (Paul defines it as sufficient) of scripture in the life of the believer. Paul reminds him of the role scriptures played in his faith in Christ. If there was nothing else scripture alone is able to bring saving knowledge.

Yes, Scripture can lead us to salvation. But the fact is, there is much else. If Scripture was all that was needed then Jesus would not have established a Church, and charged that Church with the duty of equipping the saints. The saints are not to go into the Scriptures and try to equip themselves (apart from the Apostolic Teaching). Let us look at what the text says:

2 Tim 3:16-17
16 All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

Scripture is profitable. And in whose hands is it most profitable? To whom is given the authority to equip the saints?

Eph 4:11-15
11 And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ; 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles.

God gave pastors and teachers as gifts to the Church. What is their job? To EQUIP the saints. This duty lies with the Church to prevent any “different doctrine” from being taught. That is why the Scriptures should never be separated from the faith that produced them.