Talked to JW's today

[ZeugenJehovas]

Very disturbing!

• It’'s not very disturbing because I still don’t see what relationship Pope Urban VIII and Galileo has with being chronicled or related with apostasy. Except that Galileo was considered an apostate by the Church.
• I don’t see the labeling of Council of Ephesus as apostates.
• I only see how Pope Sixtus IV was related to having been during the Inquisition.
• Pope Alexander VI, I’m done checking your claim… Their is no proof we labeled them as apostates.

It’s not disturbing at all. The articles only state the historic facts.

I of course believe as Jehovah’s Witnesses, I think it’s logical if the prophesy was that the time after the Apostols would be of people who deviated from Christ’s teachings.

• “However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons”. (1 Timothy 4:1)
• He indicates it would progress in Acts 20:29 “I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among YOU and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among YOU yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.”
  2 Timothy 4:3 " For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled."

There is undoubtedly facts found in the Bible of such belief and reasoning, it was prophesy.

Then certainly there should be worry for you Catholics of belonging to those whom deviated since you zealous ones say Paul was the first Pope, but you should now know that after him there was the period in which you are prideful at boasting of, and are believing ideas of which the apostates made up, in spite of current restored Biblical knowledge and the fulfillment of the prophesy of those who preach God’s name in the last days door to door and public places, Jehovah’s Witnesses.

 

[lilypadrees]

The only question I would ask is why JWs think Jesus is Michael the Archangel. Where is their proof in the Bible?

 

[adf417]

Their is no proof we labeled them as apostates.

Do you have another name for those who have deviated from the truth or are the people I have listed considered true believers?

It’s not disturbing at all. The articles only state the historic facts

im not disputing the validity of the article necessarily. Im questioning how is it that an organization of God would chronicle people who have deviated form the truth and at the same time not name one true believer prior to Russell. That is what is disturbing.

There is undoubtedly facts found in the Bible of such belief and reasoning, it was prophesy.

Yes, per your interpretation which you have completely failed to prove it is the authentic and right interpretation. You continue to profess your own understanding and I respect that position but please open your eyes to the fact that even the Muslims and Mormon do the same. If you cant PROOVE your interpretation is the correct one and how one can know this then that’s all it is, your own interpretation and everybody has one.

Peace!!!

 

[Wesrock]

Wesrock:

Koine Greek only has a definite article. It has no indefinite article. Sometimes it’s appropriate to insert an indefinite article, other times no.

Well I spoke of Sahidic Coptic. It allowed for better understanding of the Greek.

to stress certain concepts.

If it were so the verse would be in accordance to John 1:18 “No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is at the Father’s side is the one who has explained Him.”
Even if it were allowed to be “the god” in 1:1, then 1:18 explains John’s position of understanding about how Jesus was a god. That would be is using the context, therefore it still does not make Jesus the God Almighty. Being too technical without (context) logic will certainly mislead many.

Returning to the apparently ignored subject of the Sahidic Coptic which also apparently is undebatable since you never addressed that, it is very clear that they translated it from Greek into Coptic with the corresponding articles before “god”. Just as by checking multiple Bible cross references to get the BEST understanding on a certain topic, the same way with finding multiple ancient Master Texts for us to adjust to.

You’re imposing English grammar on the Coptic texts. The Coptics were, interestingly, one of the early communities to embrace Nicene Christianity wholesale, and one of their own bishops was a major author of its creed and defender of its apostolic origin, so it would represent quite a shift in theology for the Copts if your argument were true. However, the qualitative interpretation of the indefinite article here would seem to fit all of the similar occurrences in the New Testament better which makes it a better interpretative option. You and I are familiar with the typical the/an/a articles in English, but in Coptic it can also be used to mean that the subject has the qualities of the predicate nominative in question, such that a dynamic translation from Coptic to English would read “and the Word possesses the same qualities as God,” keeping the persons of the Father and Word distinct but completely consistent with Nicene “homoousios” Christianity, as known to be strongly endorsed by the Copts and Saint Athanasius. The copts had other words they could have used to indicate a divine but not God being, as well, which they declined to use. John 1:18 and 20:28 also, in Coptic, both declare Jesus to be God, the manuscript even goes on to state, “Jesus Christ, who is God.” So I hope you can at least admit this Coptic manuscript does not serve as the definitive proof you tout it as being.

 

[Wesrock]

Sure, it’s great to know Jesus admits only to be God’s Son. I am certain about it. Jesus Christ did not indirectly signal that he was God. It seems more evident that You are reading more into the verses than what there really is.

Or that you’re reading it outside of first century Jewish mindset.

And also, you’re inserting another indefinite article into John 10:33. We consistently translate it as, "because you, being a man, make yourself God.” Which better fits Jewish objection anyway, since he points people to himself and makes himself the Torah and way.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

why JWs think Jesus is Michael the Archangel. Where is their proof in the Bible?

1 Thessalonians 4:16 “because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice”.
Daniel 12:1 “During that time Miʹcha·el will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of your people. And there will occur a time of distress such as has not occurred since there came to be a nation until that time. And during that time your people will escape, everyone who is found written down in the book.”
1 Peter 3:22
“For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.” (Isaiah 9:6)
"The Son of man came to seek and to save what was lost; While they were listening to these things, he told another illustration, because he was near Jerusalem and they thought that the Kingdom of God was going to appear instantly. So he said: “A man of noble birth traveled to a distant land to secure kingly power for himself and to return. […] [The nobleman said,] 'Bring these enemies of mine here who did not want me to become king over them and execute them in front of me.” (Luke 19:10-12, 27) (Also see John 3:13 to identify the Christ)
“I kept watching in the visions of the night, and look! with the clouds of the heavens, someone like a son of man was coming; and he gained access to the Ancient of Days, and they brought him up close before that One. And to him there were given rulership, honor, and a kingdom (Daniel 7:13)
Matthew 24:30 " Then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”
We can identify Jesus according to the evidence presented:

• Jesus was born and recognized as the Prince of Peace.
• Archangel Michael is the Great Prince.
• The Son of Man is parallel to Michael since they both are to make a judgement, they are the same titled by different roles.
• Christ Jesus compared the Son of Man to a nobleman, because the Nobleman was to execute those rebels we know it refers to Armageddon. Christ Jesus who was known as Prince Michael will execute judgement in Armageddon.
  That’s how we know (besides other verses that asure it) Jesus was surely the Archangel Prince Michael in his preexistence. That is why Jesus said “Most truly I say to you, before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” (John 8:58)
  “So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.” (John 17:5) (Colossians 1:15)

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

Yes, per your interpretation which you have completely failed to prove it is the authentic and right interpretation. You continue to profess your own understanding and I respect that position but please open your eyes to the fact that even the Muslims and Mormon do the same. If you cant PROOVE your interpretation is the correct one and how one can know this then that’s all it is, your own interpretation and everybody has one.

And that’s the dilemma of the different religions. The reasons that one may believe certain teachings are correct would depend on the person’s thought of what makes sense or that of which is convenient.

I see no other interpretation available of these verses. Could you render the Catholic or your interpretation of it?

Everyone must make up their mind. What Jehovah’s Witnesses do is just preach the Good News of the future by means of Christ’s Kingdom by advising people to READ their Bibles constantly.

I also sense you take for granted that other religions would actually research their own beliefs as we do of the Bible.

Im questioning how is it that an organization of God would chronicle people who have deviated form the truth and at the same time not name one true believer prior to Russell.

I think your bending the historic articles in our publication to appear that its an attack on the Church.
I know I’ve already answered it with:

I think it’s logical if the prophesy was that the time after the Apostols would be of people who deviated from Christ’s teachings.

• “However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith , paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons”. (1 Timothy 4:1)
• He indicates it would progress in Acts 20:29 “I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among YOU and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among YOU yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.”
  2 Timothy 4:3 " For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching , but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled."

Now with the first question:

Do you have another name for those who have deviated from the truth or are the people I have listed considered true believers?

Apostasy is the term we use, but, they aren’t individually considered apostates.
They are not true Christian believers because they believed or promoted the twisting of Bible verse interpretation notably in favor of the pagans in many instances. As the case of Christmas, the reverence of the Saints, and the Trinity which is not evident in the Bible.

 

[Wesrock]

We can identify Jesus according to the evidence presented:

• Jesus was born and recognized as the Prince of Peace.

Jesus was born. So? And yes, he is called the Prince of Peace.

• Archangel Michael is the Great Prince.

This doesn’t imply one is the other.

• The Son of Man is parallel to Michael since they both are to make a judgement, they are the same titled by different roles.

Where in your quotations is Michael responsible for judgement. The Son of Man will be seen coming on a cloud, the cloud represents the coming of and overshadowing of God.

• Christ Jesus compared the Son of Man to a nobleman, because the Nobleman was to execute those rebels we know it refers to Armageddon. Christ Jesus who was known as Prince Michael will execute judgement in Armageddon.
  That’s how we know (besides other verses that asure it) Jesus was surely the Archangel Prince Michael in his preexistence.

You’re making connections that aren’t there.

That is why Jesus said “Most truly I say to you, before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” (John 8:58)

Before Abraham was, I AM. The greek here is ego eimi, which is a direct reference to the theophany of the burning bush. “I am that I am” and “Tell the people I AM sends you.” I AM in the greek in both of those statements is ego eimi, and that is what occurs here. Ego eimi is used also in John 18:

“Jesus said to them, “I am He. ” And Judas, who betrayed Him, also stood with them. 6 Now when He said to them, “I am He, ” they drew back and fell to the ground.”

Here translated as “I am He” is the greek phrase “ego eimi,” and the guards who arrest Jesus fall back and to the ground at hearing it because they know he’s referencing scripture and the theophany at the burning bush, the divine name.

“So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.” (John 17:5) (Colossians 1:15)

So the glory of the Word is the glory of the Father.

 

[mVitus]

Then certainly there should be worry for you Catholics of belonging to those whom deviated since you zealous ones say Paul was the first Pope, but you should now know that after him there was the period in which you are prideful at boasting of, and are believing ideas of which the apostates made up, in spite of current restored Biblical knowledge and the fulfillment of the prophesy of those who preach God’s name in the last days door to door and public places, Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Few things.

1. Peter, not Paul, was the first pope.
2. When it comes to people leaving the faith, we’ve got that covered. The Gnostic heresy was very widespread. Pre-Schism, there were heresies floating around even after the Gnostics. Then the East-West Schism, eventually the Protestant Reformation. But through it all, the Church Christ founded continued and still continues. Even the rise of Islam could be seen as a Christian heresy of sorts. We’re not ignorant of apostasies happening, and the Gnostics were big before it ended, it’s that we believe Christ’s promise of His Church not being overcomes even by the gates of he’ll stands. And we have the line of papal succession.
3. Thks is a great era to be alive. The Didache was rediscovered. Archaelogical research has helped clarify ancient thinking on some things. The age of information and easily available translations make study much easier. And the more we look, the more Catholic we see it.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

keeping the persons of the Father and Word distinct but completely consistent with Nicene “homoousios” Christianity,

The deal here is, the Bible is not to be translated according to a religion, rather for it to be translated as it is. The verse says what is says, period.

John 1:18 and 20:28 also, in Coptic, both declare Jesus to be God, the manuscript even goes on to state, “Jesus Christ, who is God.” So I hope you can at least admit this Coptic manuscript does not serve as the definitive proof you tout it as being.

Even so, Jesus was WITH another God. (1:1), and no one has seen God (1:18). So in the logical sense, there are 2 distinct persons of which the Greek speaks of.
The Sahidic Coptic is not so simple as you mentioned; it has its own set of language ‘rules’.
The near following translation of the Bohairic dialect of Coptic used the expression of “the only-begotten god”, that is ‘created god’.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

Peter , not Paul, was the first pope.

woops. Typo as I speedtyped.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

The Didache was rediscovered. Archaelogical research has helped clarify ancient thinking on some things. The age of information and easily available translations make study much easier. And the more we look, the more Catholic we see it.

Yet the Catholic’s deny the literal interpretation of Christ’s teachings. Therefore, its useless to have zeal in Catholicism by denying Jesus teachings in a subtle manner.

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

That sounds like a stretch.

 

[Crusader13]

ZeugenJehovas, you’ve argued very well for your beliefs. Even though we disagree on fundamental grounds, the application of eisegetical vs exegetical interpretations of scripture, etc, etc. I do appreciate your willingness to discuss these differences.

If I may ask you a personal question. I don’t know your background or how long you’ve been one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, but have you found it difficult reconciling your faith with the changes in doctrine or at least the perceived doctrinal changes regarding their eschatological teachings.

My in-laws are devout Witnesses and have attempted to share “the truth” with my wife and I on several occasions and a major stumbling block has always been the ever changing application of certain teachings regarding their eschatology.

Has this been a source of contention with you?

 

[po18guy]

Time spent delaying them on their “rounds” is time well spent. You are keeping them from luring others away from Christ, and at the same time defending the church which Christ founded for their salvation.

Since they will not admit to error, what we do is plant seeds.

 

[po18guy]

A Kindergarten-level, out of context reading of 1 Thessalonians 4:16

For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.

The same with many verses, including the phohibition against “drinking blood” in Deuternomy. JWs have died because of this life-threatenting fatal error in the Protestant doctrine of bible alone.

Oh, they claim they are not Protestants. Right. 66 book bible. Bible alone. The two foundational aspects of Protestantism.

My hematologist notes the utter hypocrisy of the JW “leadership” in that a JW pastor(?) will come to him with a blood cancer. Dr. advises them that, without a transfusion, they cannot survive. They then disappear and reappear with official permission. Lesser JWs simply die.

Is this not a deadly joke to play upon those who are duped into following such teachings?

 

[adf417]

And that’s the dilemma of the different religions. The reasons that one may believe certain teachings are correct would depend on the person’s thought of what makes sense or that of which is convenient.

Are you suggesting one must be able to read and understand everything in the bible to be saved? does this include knowing for themselves which books belong in the bible and which books don’t? Im pretty sure I cant measure up myself to this level of intelligence.

I see no other interpretation available of these verses. Could you render the Catholic or your interpretation of it?

Yes I can but wouldn’t you just come back with your refutation and more scripture and then we would go back and forth for God knows how long. The question still remains whether or not I can or would give an interpretation is authority of that interpretation, what makes yours or mine more superior and how do you know?

Everyone must make up their mind. What Jehovah’s Witnesses do is just preach the Good News of the future by means of Christ’s Kingdom by advising people to READ their Bibles constantly.

…and handing out books like…
“What Does the Bible Really Teach”
or
other Watchtower Publications

I think your bending the historic articles in our publication to appear that its an attack on the Church.

Its in your publications as I posted. Where in your publications do you chronicle true believers of the same time periods, NOWHERE!

Apostasy is the term we use, but, they aren’t individually considered apostates.
They are not true Christian believers because they believed or promoted the twisting of Bible verse interpretation notably in favor of the pagans in many instances. As the case of Christmas, the reverence of the Saints, and the Trinity which is not evident in the Bible.

Ok fair enough. Let me rephrase my question…

Why would Gods organization chronicle, by name, so much on those not true Christians that twist the gospel, but cannot name one true believer between the Apostle John and Charles Taze Russell - 1700 year gap?

Peace, and good night for now!!!

 

[convertingtocatholic]

Please I was raised by a Jehovah’s witness. They are dangerous and will probably only break your heart. They have several failed prophecies and connections with Freemasons. And changed there beliefs thru out the years fro late 1800 s to 1920s about.

Please visit this link God bless.

Five Questions for the Jehovah’s Witnesses | Catholic Answers Tract

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

So?

“So” because the reply was not directed to you.

Where in your quotations is Michael responsible for judgement. The Son of Man will be seen coming on a cloud, the cloud represents the coming of and overshadowing of God.

“During that time Miʹcha·el will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of your people. And there will occur a time of distress such as has not occurred since there came to be a nation until that time. And during that time your people will escape, everyone who is found written down in the book” (Daniel 12:1)
“All the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief” (Matthew 24:30)
"When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit down on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will put the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left. […] These will depart into everlasting cutting-off, but the righteous ones into everlasting life.
" (Matthew 25:31-33, 46, just added to this reply )

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

Where in your publications do you chronicle true believers of the same time periods, NOWHERE!

Why would Gods organization chronicle, by name, so much on those not true Christians that twist the gospel, but cannot name one true believer between the Apostle John and Charles Taze Russell - 1700 year gap?

I will respond again with the same that I have responded for you to finally understand our perspective:

• “However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith , paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons”. (1 Timothy 4:1)
• He indicates it would progress in Acts 20:29 “I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among YOU and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among YOU yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.”
  2 Timothy 4:3 " For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching , but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled."

Therefore we know that “the inspired words clearly says that in” the “later times” [after the Apostles], “there would be a period of time when people would not put up with healthful” [Christian] “teaching”, but “will fall away from the faith” as “men would rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples”.