The End of False Religion is Near!

[ricko]

Hello Jone,

Don’t give up so easy. I had previously researched those quotes from Catholic material that the JW give and I can assure you they are taken out of context. A Catholic publication denying the very thing that the Catholic Church teaches? A little common sense applied here shows that doesn’t make any sense at all. Now, I am out of time right now but I would like you to come back tomorrow and I will show you the true wording in context from the very sources that you quote from. Is it a date?

 

[tequilamac]

Hey everybody- what does it mean when someone’s user name is that ashy gray color. I have never seen it before. Look at Jone’s name in the OP. It is barely readable.

 

[ricko]

I find it iteresting that you guys are all upset and yet you think I am??!! I think there is more going on here. If you were to read your quotes you sound upset as well. So I am finished, I see alot of hypocrisy here. Not with Damascus. But Damascus, it wouldn’t matter what I say you would take challenge with it. I gave you quotes and that wasn’t enough. Nothing will be. So goodbye I am unsuscribing.

Hey everybody- what does it mean when someone’s user name is that ashy gray color. I have never seen it before. Look at Jone’s name in the OP. It is barely readable.

It might mean that Jone unsuscribed. If so, too bad. Looks like I got here too late.

 

[Damascus]

Hey everybody- what does it mean when someone’s user name is that ashy gray color. I have never seen it before. Look at Jone’s name in the OP. It is barely readable.

It means she is not a member here anymore!

It means she gave up on “preching” as Christ asked her to!

It means she gave up! On Jehovah!

I dont know what else it can mean, since I have only seen it with Muslim posters here who could not hack it!

Jone.,

I have you in my prayers, I know you (may) doubt my prayers are heard by Jehovah- because I am a Catholic-

But Jone, I will tell you right now, I have most likely prayed more for you than most I have seen here- maybe you suckered me in, maybe you are sincere, I can not judge you, but you did not leave here with a good reason, and now I am in doubt of the use of Jehovah’s name as a consequense of your abrupt departure.

I wish you could see that we love you and want the best for you, but even if you disagree with us, I am for one willing ready and able to check into what you claim., because I fear NOT.

I dont scare easily Jone. I have Jesus Christ and he makes all possible, right Jone?

I am willing to DIE for HIM.

Forums dont scare me JONE.

 

[ricko]

Oh well, here goes anyway. This is the complete paragraph from the Catholic Enc.

In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom (“Ad. Autol.”, II, 15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian (“De pud.” c. xxi). In the next century the word is in general use. It is found in many passages of Origen (“In Ps. xvii”, 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of Origen’s pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:
There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever (P. G., X, 986

Now, reading the entire paragraph does it sound like the Trinity is denied?

 

[Damascus]

Jone was not honest with us!

She left us high and dry! jone, Jehovah does spit out of his mouth the lukewarm – I am hot Jone, come back so he will not spit you out!

 

[ricko]

Now from the same area of the Catholic Enc. establishing the divinity of Christ:

He declares that He will come to be the judge of all men (Matthew 25:31). In Jewish theology the judgment of the world was a distinctively Divine, and not a Messianic, prerogative.

In the parable of the wicked husbandmen, He describes Himself as the son of the householder, while the Prophets, one and all, are represented as the servants (Matthew 21:33 sqq.).

He is the Lord of Angels, who execute His command (Matthew 24:31).

He approves the confession of Peter when he recognizes Him, not as Messias – a step long since taken by all the Apostles – but explicitly as the Son of God: and He declares the knowledge due to a special revelation from the Father (Matthew 16:16-17).

Finally, before Caiphas He not merely declares Himself to be the Messias, but in reply to a second and distinct question affirms His claim to be the Son of God. He is instantly declared by the high priest to be guilty of blasphemy, an offense which could not have been attached to the claim to be simply the Messias (Luke 22:66-71).

 

[Mommyof02green]

tequilamac these are direct quotes from the encyclopedias. I give up. Can’t anyone do research? Maybe if this is what you think I should become one! Obviously I have more in common with them then I thought. I think it’s terrifically close minded to shut out direct information. Did it ever occur to you that all people have access to the same info if they research it? Look it up yourself in the meantime, I’m going to talk to them and find out, it’s probably a good idea. Thanks for the idea

Jone,

I hear you say that you are NOT a JW, and frankly I will have to take you at your word for it, seeing I don’t know you.

However I wonder why you choose to post in THIS thread. You are free to post where ever you want. I just wonder of all the threads here on CAF what was it about this one that made you post here.

This thread is about the JW latest tract “The End of False Religion is Near”. The mods have already have come on the thread once asking that we stick to the topic of the thread, seeing it started to derail and get off topic.

When threads derail the mods lock them. I don’t think anyone here wants to see the tread get lock/close.

So we are suppose to be sticking to the topic. Which again is about the JW latest track “The End of False Religion is Near!”

Anyway, I just wonder.
Do you Jone, have anything to say re: the track?

 

[Damascus]

Jone,

I am also unsubscribing from this thread. If you truly really love Jehovah and want to follow him, you know how to reach me. PM me. Or invite me to a new thread you are free to make at any time, even if you wish to use a new name, I will not forsake you or belittle you. I will answer any question you pose, and if I can not, I will never give up on you and ask others who have more gifts from Jehovah to aid you in his name, the Allmighty.

Many prayers Jone. I know how you feel right now. Its hard, right?

 

[geraldffff]

Jone,

I am also unsubscribing from this thread. If you truly really love Jehovah and want to follow him, you know how to reach me. PM me. Or invite me to a new thread you are free to make at any time, even if you wish to use a new name, I will not forsake you or belittle you. I will answer any question you pose, and if I can not, I will never give up on you and ask others who have more gifts from Jehovah to aid you in his name, the Allmighty.

Many prayers Jone. I know how you feel right now. Its hard, right?

Damascus a good Jw should know that your leaders at the Watchtower Society could disfellowship you for “associating your mind with the writtings of unbelivers” or do you have a special dispensation from that rule. Jone seems to think you have denied your JW status. Why is that? Are you already disfellowshipped?

 

[tequilamac]

Damascus a good Jw should know that your leaders at the Watchtower Society could disfellowship you for “associating your mind with the writtings of unbelivers” or do you have a special dispensation from that rule. Jone seems to think you have denied your JW status. Why is that? Are you already disfellowshipped?

Man this forum is getting stranger and stranger this weekend.
Who will come along next?

Hey wake up Damascus you are being “disfellowshipped.” Is that anything like being made to walk the plank?

This has been the wierdest weekend on CA. I just think people have been adding brandy to their eggnog.

 

[Sandi]

I haven’t read all the posts on this long thread, but I too have noticed that the JW’s for some reason, really get the screaming heebie jeebies when it comes to the Catholic Church. My sister is Catholic and her son married a JW and converted, and boy, is there a lot of very careful walking-on-eggshells when they get together.

Eventually she had to put her footd down and tell him very sternly that she was polite and respectful of his beliefs and she expected him to do the same for her or they wouldn’t be on speaking terms any more–that’s what it took to get him to finally back off.

I don’t know what it is about the Catholic Church that gives them the willies but they sure do seem to really dislike it.

 

[geraldffff]

Man this forum is getting stranger and stranger this weekend.
Who will come along next?

Hey wake up Damascus you are being “disfellowshipped.” Is that anything like being made to walk the plank?

This has been the wierdest weekend on CA. I just think people have been adding brandy to their eggnog.

Being disfellowshipped is the JW equivilant of the Catholic excommunication. JW’s in good standing are forbidden by the Watchtower society to read materials written by Catholics or Protestants. This is called “associating their minds with unbelivers”. Jw’s belief is parallel to Moslem belief about who Jesus was. Mabey the rise of Islam and the decline of Christianity is why they are tooting their horns at this time.

 

[tequilamac]

Being disfellowshipped is the JW equivilant of the Catholic excommunication. JW’s in good standing are forbidden by the Watchtower society to read materials written by Catholics or Protestants. This is called “associating their minds with unbelivers”. Jw’s belief is parallel to Moslem belief about who Jesus was. Mabey the rise of Islam and the decline of Christianity is why they are tooting their horns at this time.

I know that. I was just laughing because Damascus is a Catholic. He is truly “disfellowshipped.”

 

[geraldffff]

I haven’t read all the posts on this long thread, but I too have noticed that the JW’s for some reason, really get the screaming heebie jeebies when it comes to the Catholic Church. My sister is Catholic and her son married a JW and converted, and boy, is there a lot of very careful walking-on-eggshells when they get together.

Eventually she had to put her footd down and tell him very sternly that she was polite and respectful of his beliefs and she expected him to do the same for her or they wouldn’t be on speaking terms any more–that’s what it took to get him to finally back off.

I don’t know what it is about the Catholic Church that gives them the willies but they sure do seem to really dislike it.

Charles Taze Russel started the religion in the 1800’s. He Believed in the cross of Christ. the modern day witnesses teach that Jesus did not die on a cross. That is just one example of their false witnessing. Try to reconcile that difference. I pity your sister, there is nothing but torcher in that situation. Her grandchildren, if they have any, will not be allowed to associate with her in any meaningfull way.

 

[geraldffff]

I know that. I was just laughing because Damascus is a Catholic. He is truly “disfellowshipped.”

Now that truly is funny. I have an older brother that is a witness. He has not spoken to me for many years as I pointed out to him that if , as they teach the body Jesus exposed to Thomas was just a “sembelance” of his original body then he was teaching that Jesus decieved Thomas into beliving he rose from the dead.

 

[Sandi]

You’re right but you’re wrong, too. It IS a very tough situation but her son and daughter-in-law let her see the grandchildren as much as she wants.

Ironically (or not–this is a common phenomenon), it’s her SON–the convert-- that’s the real hard-a** about his JW-ness. His wife is a cradle JW and she hasn’t even been baptized yet (they’re both in their 30’s) and is much more easy-going.

A few years ago, his wife’s sister was getting married and invited their 2 daughters to be junior bridesmaids in her wedding. My nephew forbad it because she was marrying a non-JW. (His wife tried to persuade him to change his mind but he was dead-set against it.) And guess what–when this same nephew, my sister’s son, got married to his wife, HE wasn’t a JW. How hypocritical is that?

And since one of his daughters died of a brain tumor at the age of 10 this summer, I wonder if he now regrets not letting her be in the wedding she had her heart set on.

 

[AHF]

Oh well, here goes anyway. This is the complete paragraph from the Catholic Enc.

In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom (“Ad. Autol.”, II, 15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian (“De pud.” c. xxi). In the next century the word is in general use. It is found in many passages of Origen (“In Ps. xvii”, 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of Origen’s pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:
There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever (P. G., X, 986

Now, reading the entire paragraph does it sound like the Trinity is denied?

Good find Ricko.

WT literature is full of selective quotes from non-Witness sources that seemingly support WT doctrine. Ironically - individual Witnesses are highly discouraged from reading those sources first-hand; but the people responsible for writing the literature apparantly may comb through them to find the quote they are looking for. They often quote, in fact, without providing the adequate references that would enable the reader to look it up - a practice that wouldn’t even pass in an introductory composition class.

Here is a site - that, while no friend of Catholics , looks into the WT’s pracitce of quoting Catholic material.

And jone, for my :twocents: worth - please consider coming back.

 

[Damascus]

HOW DID I BECOME A WITNESS???

And now a bad witness too?

I AM A PAPIST AND WILL DIE ONE!!!

This is funny, sad and weird I agree. Strange stuff has been going on and I chalk it up to spending too much time trying to figure out the mind of someone in a dangerous cult!!!



At least this is funny now. That was close!

 

[geraldffff]

HOW DID I BECOME A WITNESS???

And now a bad witness too?

I AM A PAPIST AND WILL DIE ONE!!!

This is funny, sad and weird I agree. Strange stuff has been going on and I chalk it up to spending too much time trying to figure out the mind of someone in a dangerous cult!!!



At least this is funny now. That was close!

My ignorance and lack of investigation made you a witness! But wait is not that how all witnesses are made? I happened upon and cruised through this thread of 400 and picked what I wished to use… Wait is not that way the Jws develop their theology. There you were confessing the wrong name and claiming you too were going to unsubscribe.So I thought I would test you to see if you were in fact a real “attack” Jw. I was just on the “Why eat to remember?” Thread where there was a witness with a very novel explaination of the etiology of the word canaibal. I think it is a classic.