What is your take on "Jehovah's Witnesses" sect?

[DelsonJacobs]

How does one know if he or she is part of the 144,000? Historically, are there people who they can look to and say “Yep, he’s in that number?” Take, for example, the Transfiguration of Christ. Moses and Elijah were speaking to Jesus. Would they look at that and say, “OK, those are two guys who were important in the history of Judaism and ultimately Christianity, and they came from somewhere to have a chat with Jesus, so, really there’s only room for 143,998, because certainly those guys are up there.”

First of all, Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that only those who became Christians after Pentecost can enter heaven and thus be counted as among the 144,000.

This means people like Moses and Elijah and even John the Baptist (since he died before Jesus’ death and resurrection) cannot be included in that number.

As to who is exactly in that number the Witnesses have always claimed that only God knows, with the following stipulations:

• It is a requisite that all Governing Body members be selected from the 144,000
• All early members of the Jehovah’s Witnesses who were faithful until death were likely of the 144,000, such as Charles Taze Russell
• The choosing began with the apostles in the first century
• All who currently claim to be of the 144,000 also claim to be members of the Jehovah’s Witness religion…and miraculously no other!

Again no Moses, Elijah,* not even Abraham* are allowed in heaven. Basically no Jews allowed among the saints, according to their doctrine…one of the reasons that upon learning this that I, as a Jew, eventually found their religion incompatible with my very being.

And how does one know they are of this number, according to Witness belief? I’ve included that in your next question.

What would happen if one says they’re part of the 144,000?

Since the Witnesses believe that the written word, and not Jesus, was God’s final revelation to humanity, they believe it carries a secret message encoded in such a manner that no one can understand but these 144,000. When one of these comes into contact with this “secret coded document from God,” they suddenly comprehend its true meaning, a meaning which cannot be grasped by anyone else but members of the 144,000.

So when one of these reads certain phrases in the Bible they know it applies only to them, such as:

As for you, the anointing that you received from him remains in you, so that you do not need anyone to teach you. But his anointing teaches you about everything and is true and not false; just as it taught you, remain in him.–1 John 2:27.

If the reader responds inwardly along the lines: "I have been anointed by God and I therefore don’t need anyone to teach me what the Bible means because my understanding of it is true by virtue of my anointing (selection to be of the 144,000)–and if they can do this with a clear conscience, their theology teaches they are of the 144,000.

When they read other verses that say things like: “Therefore, holy ‘brothers,’ sharing in a heavenly calling, reflect on Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession…”–they say inside of themselves upon reading: “That heavenly calling is for me.”–Hebrews 3:1.

When they read verses that speak about “children of God” or “sons of God,” they have something inside of them that tells them: “That’s me! I’m a child of God because God has given me an inward testimony to this fact.”

They feel that when they call God “Father,” that they mean “Father” in a way that no one but they can understand since only they are truly children of God unlike the rest of us. This is how they exclusively apply the verses found at Romans 8:14-17 to themselves, and only themselves believe they are of this number:

For those who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you received a spirit of adoption, through which we cry, “Abba,* Father!” The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if only we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him.

So what happens next? Well, most of the time it comes up just once a year, at the annual Memorial of Christ’s death, the once-a-year communion service they have. If you are of the 144,000, then only you will get to partake of the bread and wine at their communion.

Today relatively new ones who make this claim are chastised. considered to be of questionable character, possibly mentally unstable, as up until recently the Governing Body taught that this call to heaven ended in 1935. With the sudden 5000 count increase to their number over the past few years, they said the 1935 date was invalid, but they also intimated that some instability had to exist in anyone who made such a claim after that invalid date.

Since in the Bible, the imagery in Revelation is mostly men, are no women part of the 144,000?

Both men and women are of this number.

And finally, since the JW’s enjoy changing their teachings like I change my socks, could one day a person who’s passed be part of the 144,000 and then not? Like maybe someone says Paul is part of the 144k, but then someone realizes that he used to persecute Christians, so he’s out. Do they go back and forth over who has made it and who hasn’t?

If you claim to be other anointed but then become wicked before you die, your death is final and you become non-existent upon it. Since they have no way to know who made it or who hasn’t they seem to expect a few to pop up here and there to replace anyone who may have “failed” to live up to their “heavenly calling.”

 

[DelsonJacobs]

How someone becomes a part of the 144,000 is very informal. There are no proofs to the congregation other than the member claims to be and begins to partake of the wine and bread at the once a year Memorial of the Last Supper.

Typically of someone who claims to be of the 144,000, they say it came to them by means of the Holy Spirit and they just know they have a heavenly calling.

No one loses their status of being in the 144,000 as far as I know except through apostasy. An example of this is the former Governing Body member Raymond Franz. He was tasked in writing an encyclopedia of Bible teachings and found many of the Jehovah’s Witnesses beliefs to be wrong. Raymond Franz was basically forced out of the headquarters and later was disfellowshipped for having a meal with a friend who disassociated from the religion.

Raymond Franz is basically considered a modern day Judas by Jehovah’s Witnesses as he published two books. One primarily on his life experiences, time on the Governing Body, and the witch hunt around 1980 at the headquarters to weed out those who started developing beliefs that didn’t match the official teachings. The second book was about Christian freedom railing against a legalistic approach.

Kudos! You are so more concise than I am at supplying answers. I like that!

 

[Pronger1]

Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Catholicism stems from a great apostasy following the death of the Apostles. They believe that further proof of those happened with Constantine’s involvement in calling the Council of Nicea. To them the belief of the Trinity was a pagan perversion of the nature of God and that Constantine played a critical role in paganism further corrupting Christianity.

Jehovah’s Witnesses believe the clergy to be the man of lawlessness in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12.

To them the beginning of their faith is the restoration of first century Christianity on Earth in the last days before God’s judgment at Armageddon.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Catholicism stems from a great apostasy following the death of the Apostles. They believe that further proof of those happened with Constantine’s involvement in calling the Council of Nicea. To them the belief of the Trinity was a pagan perversion of the nature of God and that Constantine played a critical role in paganism further corrupting Christianity.

Jehovah’s Witnesses believe the clergy to be the man of lawlessness in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12.

To them the beginning of their faith is the restoration of first century Christianity on Earth in the last days before God’s judgment at Armageddon.

Yeah, that’s pretty much standard anti-catholic rhetoric that you are going to find that other restorationist groups subscribe to and promote themselves and Catholicism.

This is one of those things I call an “I’m-actually-telling-you-how-little-education-I-have-in-history-and-general-stuff” comment made by some groups and their members. To illustrate:

While Emperor Constantine indeed convened (formally assembled) the Council, it was at the behest of the Catholic bishop of Corduba, Hosius, that he did so. He was a member of the Emperor’s court as well as Constantine’s most prized Christian advisor, perhaps even his spiritual director or catechist in the Catholic faith. I don’t know of any Jehovah’s Witnesses who know who Hosius was.

It was Hosius who was alarmed by the Arian crisis and historians agree that it was probably him, and not the Emperor, who presided over the Council of Nicea. Constantine used his influence over this early Church council to establish a consensus among religious leadership and Church members to keep his territory from splitting apart from under him. I remember hearing some Witnesses claim that Constantine was involved in the actual preparation of doctrine that came from the council, but I also knew these same ones never got this information from an actual history book.

It shows how sheltered Witnesses are that they never check for themselves (something now simple to do with the Internet), to see how the Emperor had little more to do with the religious issues, and that it was Hosius who was taking the lead against the Arians, as history will tell you Hosius did for the rest of his life. Constantine brought no “pagan” influence/teachings to the council because Hosius would have never allowed it. The Council, for all practical terms, was Hosius’s show, not the Emperor’s.

This “restoration” idea the Watchtower adheres to shows it’s age and origins, coming from the American period where new religions, each claiming to be the “one, true restoration of Christ’s church” began popping up everywhere, especially in New England. These “restoration” movements share an earmark:

• Final revelation is attributed to the Written Word, and a claim to being the exclusive interpreters thereof (for Russell it was the Bible, for Smith it was The Book of Mormon).
• Current, not future, events were interpreted as “proof” that the end was upon them.
• The groups were heavy on setting dates, using charts, dispensationalism, the restoration of Israel or claiming they were a replacement for Israel.
• All other religions, especially Catholicism, were labeled evil, “the Man of Perdition/Lawlessness,” “The Anti-Christ” and/or “the Whore of Babylon,” with additional judgmental connections to each from Scripture.

You sound, however, as one who might have been aware or at least suspected all this while you were a Witness and tried to help others see how limited they were being in their scope of knowledge of history. Tell me, were you like me and tried to get others to see things while you were a Witness? How did you manage to survive what was likely very difficult and stressful circumstances as a result?

 

[Ed_Silvia]

By the way, I don’t believe that JW’s have any particular or unusual problems with their hair. The term is heretical.

Peace.

My bad

 

[chefmomster2]

I have limited experience with JW, but I did have one memorable visit from a group one day.

It was in the late morning when three people showed up at my door to speak to me and deliver the Watchtower. (Some JW came around about once every 6 months at the time.) They were quite friendly and smiling. They gradually moved closer and closer to me as they told me more about themselves. I was curious about them and their beliefs so I let them speak for a few minutes. Finally they invited me to join them. I paused for a moment, looked at their expectant faces and said, " I am a devout Roman Catholic and I love my faith."

I was about to invite them to come to my church when they audibly inhaled, turned quite pale, quickly backed off, wished me well and literally RAN away.

After that day I would see them from time-to-time going through my neighborhood. They never again stopped at my home. NEVER! (Not in over 10 years!)

 

[churchatheist]

I am an atheist but I have a habit of going to various churches to see what they say and what they are like. I actually took up the Jehovah’s Witnesses on their invitation one time when they stopped by my door. The service was uninspired. They had some hymns (nothing I was familiar with) some prayers, and a sermon of sorts. A number of things struck me, though, which bothered me. Not all their services are open to the public. Only ones which nonmembers are invited to. (At least, that is the impression that I got when they said, “invite people to the service for two weeks from now, since that one is open to the public.”) How strange. I figure if you’re a proselytizing sect that claims to possess the truth to salvation, open your doors and let everyone see what you have to say.

Consistent with this secretiveness is the system of education and proselytization, all of which stems from the Watchtower Society. This NYC-based organization controls all the literature and, from what I can tell, all the liturgy. The literature they have is incredibly simplified and one-directional. It asks questions then answers them with simple, Bible-based rationales, which do not suggest any diversity of opinion, any nuance to the complicated ethical questions, and completely ignore all modern Biblical scholarship, not to mention the sciences of archaeology and biology.

It is a centralized, secretive system which is designed to attract and control people who are reluctant to think for themselves, in my opinion.

It is worth pointing out that some of the criticism I have of the JW is the same as that which I have of the Catholic Church. This is not the appropriate place to get into such criticism, but I would point out that many of the things which Catholics in this thread have said about the JWs could easily be said about themselves. There is a great deal of mockery, criticism, and condescension regarding the JWs understanding of history, truth, and spirituality, but any person with some tolerant fair-mindedness will recognize that all religions seem weird or wrong to those who are not practitioners of them. Are the claims of JWs about God really any less strange–from an objective standpoint–than those of the Catholic Church? Keep in mind that the Bible says that believers will be misunderstood, mocked for, and persecuted for their faith, and that they should accept such a fate. Take caution about the tone with which you deride the beliefs of others.

Moreover, more than one commenter in this thread has commented that the JWs change their beliefs frequently. While the Catholic Church may have its millennia-old direct line to St. Peter, it is not immune from massive changes in its stance on a whole variety of topics: compare the JWs changes of belief to the Catholics’ changes of belief regarding torture, the existence of Purgatory, the role of money in the church, witchcraft, the stoning of adulterers, or a heliocentric solar system, just to name a few. If I were a betting man, I’d guess that 100 years from now the Vatican will have no problem with homosexuality either. Just a guess.

Criticize their ethical stances, if you like. Criticize their social systems if you have good reason. Criticize their proselytization if you like, or their literature, as I have, or their centralized, secretive hierarchy, as I have. But criticizing their religious beliefs seems silly and small, at least to a nonbeliever like myself.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

No one is a ‘non-believer.’ All believe in SOMETHING.

 

[Pronger1]

Here is the thing about Jehovah’s Witnesses’ ever changing beliefs.

Say, it is 1995. I tell others in the religion that I do not believe the door to heaven closed in 1935, and that I believe those of the 144,000 are not the Faithful & Discreet Slave of the Bible. I would be kicked out as an apostate, shunned by all family and friends.

Fast forward to 2014. The 144,000 are now not recognized as the Faithful & Discreet Slave. They now accept that while 144,000 according to them go to heaven, that door isn’t closed. If a Witness now disagrees with that and believes the previous teaching, then they are labeled an apostate and shunned.

Where is the scriptural backing of their 1935 teaching then and now? There is none.

Imagine in the 1970s having a child dying and in need of an organ transplant. They taught then that it was cannibalism and a disfellowshipping offense. Imagine then watching that child die. Then a few years later “new light” says it is ok to have an organ transplant.

There are countless examples of harm done to individuals and families by this religion based on man made teachings.

 

[Matt_Guitar_Man]

Yeah, that’s pretty much standard anti-catholic rhetoric that you are going to find that other restorationist groups subscribe to and promote themselves and Catholicism.

This is one of those things I call an “I’m-actually-telling-you-how-little-education-I-have-in-history-and-general-stuff” comment made by some groups and their members. To illustrate

Great post Delson as always. Just to add, one of the things that annoy me greatly about the whole Constantine Great Apostasy thing, is that nearly all groups who adhere to this line of thought speak of this period of history as if it existed in a vacuum. Here is a little history leading up to the event.

In the 92 years from the death of Commodus (AD 192) to the comming of Diocletian (AD284) the throne of the Ceaser had been occupied by 28 Emperors, of the 28, 22 were murdered. This period was a period of huge civil unrest and pretenders in distant provinces gaining local support and then making a bid for the throne. It was in the last half of this period that the interlectual elite, who despratly wanted stabilaty to return to goverment, felt that one of the causing factors of this instability was the fact that through Romes acceptence of other deities and religions a centralised focus in worship had been diluted as the empire continued to expand.
Gradualy a solution to this problem started to emerge. Building on the writtings of the Neoplatonist Porphyry heir to the teachings of Plotinus a hierarchical confederation of gods all under one supreme god or an all embracing supreme principle began to gain ground and acceptance. This syncrectic process culminated in the god Sol. In this one god the sun gods of the Greeks and Orientals (Helios & Baal) could all be united and placed among the official Roman pantheon.
It was the Emperor Aurelian in 274 who first minted coins with himself recieving a globe from the god Sol indicating world wide rule and the words Deus et Dominus on them, making him sol’s representative on earth or if you like the son of Sol.
After Diacletian gained the throne in 284 and after stabalising the empire it came to his attention that this more than reasnoble solution which had basicaly been embraced by all citizens no matter whom they worshiped had still been rejected by the Christians. What to do ?
Being a reasnoble man and finaly bringing a shakey peace to the empire he tried to avoide persicution at all cost it was in the mid 290’s that Hierocles, govner of Palmyra and latter Prefect of Bithynia published his work “A Friendly Discourse in Truth Directed to The Christians” This work was a friendly persuasive invitation to the christians to accept and conform to these more than reasnoble official beliefs of the Empire. The work was complete with logical arguments about the Sun being the light of the world, sustaining all things etc and these arguments were backed up by scripture such as Jn. 1:9 which called Christ “the true light which enlightens every man” which he reasoned after all was the work of the sun. and also Hebrew scriptures such as Mal. 4:2 which called the Messias “the sun of justice”. Being an appostate Christian Hierocles made good sound arguments and his work was summerized in pamphlet form and spread through out the entire empire.
In 297 after nearly ten years of trying to get the Christians to see reason the persicutians begun.
They started first in the army with those who would not make the official sacrafice (Burning of incense) at the alter in front of the deified son of god (the empror) along with the accompnying Oath to be striped of all rank and dispersed to the most troubelsem spots along the frontier on half pay.
It took about 5 years to make sure Christians could not unite in armed malitia before the wide spread persicutions realy begun.
In 303 the first ever official state wide law against christianity was posted. All Clerics from Bishops on down were to be imprisoned imidiatly, all official places of worship were to be demolished, all sacred books burnt, any one who would not make the official sacrafice thier property was forfit to the state treasury, they were not allowed to enter the market place and upon interigation under torture if they still did not recant they were sent to the mines as forced laboure.
In 304 after a failed bungle on the Emprors Life the Death sentence was introduced for these persicutions and the bodies were denied burial and flung into the sea.
For 10 years this was an official State wide Progrom.
In the West Constantines farther who ruled then was the most leniant in this respect and refused to take out an extermination Progrom in his area.

This whole process devolved into a blood bath in the East and it was during this period that Constantine emerged the victor in what was basicly a East V West civil war, and this terible Progrom against the Christians was officialy stoped with the edict of Milan in 313.

The two herisies to come from this were Donotism and Arianism.

The frame work for Ariuses arguments had already been put forward and promoted officialy to Christians by the State the seditious part of what Arius did was putting those arguments forward in orthodox language to a war weary and embateled christian community. It is interesting to note that he promoted his idieas in the same way the state did through pamphlets etc.

The best book I have found on this period is by Giuseppe Ricciotti a Benadictien Monk and Bible & Christian historian. Called the Age of Martyres Chritianity from Diocletian to Constantine. With a special in depth study of the two formost herasies of the time Donatism and arianism…

 

[boomerang]

“all religions seem weird or wrong to those who are not practitioners of them. Are the claims of jws about god really any less strange–from an objective standpoint–than those of the catholic church?”

*** JW’s are “pretend” christians. They put on a façade of christianity, which is deceptive. Even an atheist should be able to understand that it is dishonest for a religion to put on a false front for the public, while being something entirely different in private. ***

“moreover, more than one commenter in this thread has commented that the jws change their beliefs frequently. While the catholic church may have its millennia-old direct line to st. Peter, it is not immune from massive changes in its stance on a whole variety of topics: Compare the jws changes of belief to the catholics’ changes of belief regarding torture, the existence of purgatory, the role of money in the church, witchcraft, the stoning of adulterers, or a heliocentric solar system, just to name a few. If i were a betting man, i’d guess that 100 years from now the vatican will have no problem with homosexuality either.”

**The only thing above that is considered doctrine is purgatory, and that doctrine has never changed. All the other above things mentioned are merely culture, and as you know, culture can and does change with the times. Homosexuality will never be permissible in the catholic church. The bible condemns it. **

“criticize their ethical stances, if you like. Criticize their social systems if you have good reason. Criticize their proselytization if you like, or their literature, as i have, or their centralized, secretive hierarchy, as i have. But criticizing their religious beliefs seems silly and small, at least to a nonbeliever like myself.”

**I wouldn’t expect you to fully understand, being an atheist, but the one and only thing christians criticize JW’s for is their theology. None of us gives a rat’s behind about their hierarchy, social systems, secrecy, anti-flag saluting, non-voting, no blood transfusion silliness. They preach heresy. That’s all we care about. Concern about religious beliefs may seem “silly and small” to you. That is understandable. You are a non-believer. You are forming your opinions under the assumption that there is no God Who has revealed Himself to us. We form our opinions on the fact that He is real, and has revealed Himself to us, and those revelations bear no resemblance to anything that has come out of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. **

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

As I said before, no such thing as a ‘non-believer.’ Everyone believes in something. The atheist obviously believes in atheism.

Sometimes, no, most of the time, Christian ‘jargon’ annoys me, because to people who haven’t been exposed to it, and even people who have…you need a decoder ring.

 

[chefmomster2]

In an effort to be fair, I must say I am really in awe of their passion (and the LDS’) about spreading their faith. Think of the door slams, curses, and other unchariatable responses they face. I am not sure I would have the courage or fortitude to go door-to-door for my faith. Their dedication is something I certainly admire.

 

[Pronger1]

In an effort to be fair, I must say I am really in awe of their passion (and the LDS’) about spreading their faith. Think of the door slams, curses, and other unchariatable responses they face. I am not sure I would have the courage or fortitude to go door-to-door for my faith. Their dedication is something I certainly admire.

I do have to say there is an intense peer pressure to go door to door to meet a minimum of 10 hours a month. Those that aren’t regular in going door to door, unless they have illness, are thought of often as being spiritually weak. Getting “privileges” in the congregation are heavily dependent on hours put in.

Also, there is pressure to be in the “Theocratic Ministry School” to give talks several times a year in front of the congregations. If you don’t do that, it is also considered a sign of being spiritually weak.

This isn’t standard policy, but depending on the congregation or who the circuit overseer is, you may have an expectation of raising your hand to comment a certain number of times during the study of the Watchtower magazines. A circuit overseer is someone who is considered a branch representative that has multiple congregations he oversees in an assigned territory. Some of them are sticklers for rules. A couple of examples are one commenting to the whole congregation that everyone should raise there hands at least five times in the Watchtower study meeting to comment. Another openly spoke that the men of the congregation should maintain their hair where it does not touch their ears. A lot of non-Scriptural legalistic garbage.

 

[chefmomster2]

I do have to say there is an intense peer pressure to go door to door to meet a minimum of 10 hours a month. Those that aren’t regular in going door to door, unless they have illness, are thought of often as being spiritually weak. Getting “privileges” in the congregation are heavily dependent on hours put in.

Also, there is pressure to be in the “Theocratic Ministry School” to give talks several times a year in front of the congregations. If you don’t do that, it is also considered a sign of being spiritually weak.

This isn’t standard policy, but depending on the congregation or who the circuit overseer is, you may have an expectation of raising your hand to comment a certain number of times during the study of the Watchtower magazines. A circuit overseer is someone who is considered a branch representative that has multiple congregations he oversees in an assigned territory. Some of them are sticklers for rules. A couple of examples are one commenting to the whole congregation that everyone should raise there hands at least five times in the Watchtower study meeting to comment. Another openly spoke that the men of the congregation should maintain their hair where it does not touch their ears. A lot of non-Scriptural legalistic garbage.

Thanks for the info. I certainly don’t agree with nor admire the terrible pressures you describe.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

I am an atheist but I have a habit of going to various churches to see what they say and what they are like…

It is worth pointing out that some of the criticism I have of the JW is the same as that which I have of the Catholic Church. This is not the appropriate place to get into such criticism, but I would point out that many of the things which Catholics in this thread have said about the JWs could easily be said about themselves.
…
Moreover, more than one commenter in this thread has commented that the JWs change their beliefs frequently. While the Catholic Church may have its millennia-old direct line to St. Peter, it is not immune from massive changes in its stance on a whole variety of topics: compare the JWs changes of belief to the Catholics’ changes of belief regarding torture, the existence of Purgatory, the role of money in the church, witchcraft, the stoning of adulterers, or a heliocentric solar system, just to name a few…

Criticize their ethical stances, if you like. Criticize their social systems if you have good reason. Criticize their proselytization if you like, or their literature, as I have, or their centralized, secretive hierarchy, as I have. But criticizing their religious beliefs seems silly and small, at least to a nonbeliever like myself.

You are correct, in principal, on many of your generalizations. And it is indeed important that we do not unjustly criticize anyone else without having the same keen eye on ourselves.

But there is a difference between what Jehovah’s Witnesses claim and Catholics.

• Jehovah’s Witnesses will punish and excommunicate members for harboring doubts and openly questioning their doctrine, whereas Catholic doctrine forbids acting against one’s conscience in all religious matters and even allows for dissent.
• Jehovah’s Witnesses will not reinstate those excommunicated over issues of doctrine which change in favor of the excommunicated. Though the Governing Body may later adopt the very same views of those they excommunicated for having them, these remain openly hated by the JWs unless they repent of having the views “too early” or “ahead” of the Governing Body.
• Jehovah’s Witnesses have demanded much self-sacrifice in connection with set dates regarding the end of the world, and when the end did not formalize as they promised, the Governing Body condemns their faithful followers for their self-sacrifice.

There is a big difference between their Governing Body that is unapologetic and the Catholic popes who have recognized the Church’s failings and have worked to change things.

By the way, as a descendent of those persecuted in the Spanish Inquisition for being of Jewish heritage, I can fully attest that the Church never approved of torture as you state. The Spanish government recently issued a Law of Return to people like me due to the fact that the persecution of the Spanish Inquisition was politically based, and though many Church officials in Spain were involved, the Spanish Inquisition was not the same thing as the Church-approved Office of Inquisition. Though the Church admits to guilt because of the Spanish clergy’s participation, much of the crimes committed at the time were not internationally known or reported in honest to the Holy See.

The existence of Purgatory has never been doubted by the Church, and stoning was never practiced by the Roman Church. You are thinking of my ancestors in Judaism who, under Torah, were commanded to do that in ancient times.

In the end, however, I generally agree with what you are saying. Details aside, I hope your comments do not fall on deaf ears here. I admire you for adding this reminder to this thread. It is much needed.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

No one is a ‘non-believer.’ All believe in SOMETHING.

Some people use the term “non-believer” to mean they do not subscribe to belief in a deity or in religion.

Generally the same do not claim that the term excludes their belief in things such as in a friend or in the laws of gravity.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

Sometimes, no, most of the time, Christian ‘jargon’ annoys me, because to people who haven’t been exposed to it, and even people who have…you need a decoder ring.

I do agree with you on this.

As a Christian and a Jew you can probably imagine how often I just throw my hands up in the air when I hear people nitpicking over saying the same thing but with different words.

For example, your earlier comments on “belief.” To claim that “everyone believes in something” may not be agreed upon by all who practice Judaism.

While Judaism has these “Thirteen Principles of Faith,” at the same time Judaism has no dogma, no formal set of beliefs that one must hold to be a Jew. In Judaism, it’s what you DO that is more important, not what you believe.

Although having belief within Judaism is markedly important, sometimes the term as defined by Christians (even non-Christians who generalize the terms of “faith” and “belief” to reflect the general Christian view) gets rejected as a whole. You may hear things like: “We Jews don’t practice a religion of faith or belief” as a result.

We can’t demand that others accept our personal view or definition on all matters. I think, in my humble opinion, that sometimes working for a better understanding of where the other is coming from and even accepting their definition of things as valid in spite of ours can go a long way in offering people the respect each deserves, regardless if that person’s are religious or secular.

That still doesn’t mean I don’t get as frustrated with it all like you do.

 

[pacloc]

In an effort to be fair, I must say I am really in awe of their passion (and the LDS’) about spreading their faith. Think of the door slams, curses, and other unchariatable responses they face. I am not sure I would have the courage or fortitude to go door-to-door for my faith. Their dedication is something I certainly admire.

It’s a lot easier than you think. It’s more of a social gathering for them than preaching. They like to get in large car groups and do “return visits.” They usually only do one or two streets walking door to door. About 90% of the doors stay closed. The ones that do answer simply hear a sales pitch for the current magazines or an invitation to the memorial or convention. Serious Bible discussion is not done because the only people they will engage in conversation with are those they feel will take the magazines. Any confrontation is met with “Well have a nice day.” Then off to return visits. The way they get their hours is return visists. They literally “start their time” as soon as they get to someone’s house and count all the time driving around stopping at houses that again 90% or more are not home. The car group is sometimes as many as 6 because a lot of JWs buy minivans or large SUVs. You can easily get 2 hours of time a weekend only to stop at 1 or 2 of your Return Visits, at which you do not even speak to them.

I wouldn’t admire one thing about JWs if I was you. Their poison offsets any kind of goodness it appears they do. They only do it so that they can boast about it, not an exaggeration. We as Catholics need to strengthen our members, not go knock on random doors pitching a magazine. Get involved with Bible studies, prayer groups, whatever you have to help and be helped.

 

[pacloc]

From their new awake magazine:

WHAT PEOPLE SAY
It is commonly believed that once a person has been assigned to hell, there is no hope for him. Hell’s torments are said to be eternal. Those in purgatory, on the other hand, are said to attain to heavenly bliss only after a fiery purging of their sins.

WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS
After resting in death, the dead will be resurrected, or brought back to life, on earth by God’s Son. The Bible says: “Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out.” (John 5:26, 28, 29) A person’s conduct thereafter will determine whether he is granted everlasting life. *

Funny, they bring up their strange belief in both their Watchtower and Awake magazines for June. Sometimes a really long time goes by without them writing about this strange belief that we are not judged by our current lives, but on the life after the resurrection. It’s even funnier that they say “What the Bible says” and procede to write something not said in the Bible, by saying “a person’s conduct thereafter will determine whether he is granted everlasting life.” They seem to not believe the Bible at Hebrews 9:27 which says “And just as it is appointed unto men to die once and after this comes the judgment.”