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

[pacloc]

Logically, you are only making yourself look uneducated by your “thoughts” on the Trinity. First of all, all you are doing is repeating what your All Mighty Governing Body has told you is acceptable. I am certain you have never looked up any of the ancient writings on the Trinity, or anything about Christianity from the early Church. It is too bad you are not allowed to do so in fear of disobeying your leaders in New York. (But you do go on forums, which they strictly prohibit, so maybe you will give it a try) To no surprise, the Church Fathers were smart enough to see that certain scriptures could be misapplied by the uneducated to try to disprove doctrine passed on by the apostles. If you are curious about how the Church has always explained the scriptures you listed that magically disprove the Trinity, just go to CHURCH FATHERS: Home and pick your flavor. I suggest John Chrysostom since he has commentary on almost all of the new testament books and is considered a Doctor of the Church.

The bottom line about why JWs will never agree with the Church about the Trinity is because we are two separate religions. We are Christian and JWs are a confused fusion of Jewish/Islamic belief. The most important quote in Christian history that Jew/Muslims/JWs will never agree with is “God became man so that man might become God.” We have the faith that we will see and be with God, and it is only possible by God descending to lift us up to Himself. JW believe in a strange justice system that God could send a created angel, Michael to become a man and die to pay for Adam’s sin. They also have no hope to ever see God. Two very different relgions, not 2 branches of Christianity. Protestants at least share this very fundamental Christian belief.

 

[pacloc]

Also, I forgot to mention that the JW although claiming to follow “Jehovah’s” and Jesus Christ’s teaching that their is only One God, actually believe in two separate Gods. They do in fact teach that Jesus is a god, separate completely from “Jehovah.” Now they will say, “well, the Bible clearly teaches that there are many gods. Money can be a god, etc.” My response to that infant level reasoning is that we would all agree that money, sex, drugs, etc. are all false gods. Are you as JW willing to say that Jesus is a false god, when in fact we know that he is perfect. How do you then explain your mutilated interpretation of John 1:1 which calls Jesus a god???

 

[Waynec]

The church tells you this my friend.

No the bible tells me this even if the word Trinity is not mentioned it was believed . Read the letters, Jesus is God and they believed in the real presence.
The fact that the mystery is mysterious can only be an objection to a small mind which refuses that which is deeper than its understanding. We will never penetrate the mystery of God with our intellect but with faith.
I believe that JW’s are trying to understand the mysteries of God with their intellect and if so they won’t get too far.

.

Infact you need the big complex councils where people were called heretics if they didn’g tow the line to come up with confusiong doctrines like the Trinity.

You have the governing body

There is no mention of God being a Trinity in the Bible, and no mention of a mysterious “3 person in one God” until hundreds of years after the apostles had died.

Matt. 28:19-20

No wonder the church kept the Bible in Latin for so long, and labeled anyone a heretic who disagreed with the councils.

At the time you speak of if people knew how to read it was Latin that they were reading.

Smarter people than you? Don’t put yourself down friend. We don’t need to be scholars to understand the Bible.

Thanks for the encouragement.

Popes have called the Trinity “an unfathomable mystery”.
Even Popes don’t understand it!
Because it goes against common sense! How can three people who talk to each other, are described in different, unequal roles, (one of which is not even a person) be one?

Yes, that is why we need faith. God is mysterious and any one who says they can understand God with reason is fooling themselves.

God Bless

 

[adf417]

Now I dealt with this in several posts a month or so back!
Was that also with you? Is this the question you were growling at me that I didn’t answer? .

Could very well have been and if this is the extent of your answer then I apologize for assuming you did not want to discuss it any more because you have nothing else to say. But as I said before, it does/did not answer the logical follow up questions. Had you said something like “I have nothing further to add” instead of “I will get back to you once I get caught up”, I surly would not have been expecting a reply.

Here, I have found a quote from someone who knows more than me:

Professor of Church History Oskar Skarsaune says…

:

Does this mean if I find a quote from a renowned history professor or even an ex-JW that states the JW religion is an evil cult should we believe it?

There is a chart on page 302 of the 319 page document from 1963 “All Scripture is Inspired of God and Beneficial” that proves what professor Oskar Skarsaune states is false. This JW document clearly shows much confusion among the early Christians as to what the canon should be until Carthage in 397. Yes it does reference Carthage.

Your memory of you answering the question a couple months ago is impressive. Does the follow up points/questions not ring a bell? Oops! I did not mean to put this in question form.

So the Roman Catholic Church claims responsibility for the decision as to which books should be included in the Bible canon, and reference is made to the Council of Carthage (397 C.E.), where a catalog of books was formulated.
but the canon, was already settled by then. Believers knew which were included and were happily quoting from them
(they weren’t waiting with baited breath for the church to set up a council in a few hundred years and tell them . )
And it was settled, not by the decree of any council, but by the direction of God’s holy spirit—the same spirit that inspired the writing of those books in the first place.
The testimony of later noninspired catalogers is valuable only as an acknowledgment of the Bible canon, which God’s spirit had authorized.

If this is true then you should have many other books in your bible and at least Hebrews, James, and Revelation should be taken out. That is, after all, what many of the communities believed and used in their worship service.

I will save this reply incase I have to answer the same question again.

Its the follow ups that need to be answered.

Peace!!!

 

[adf417]

Yes, that is why we need faith. God is mysterious and any one who says they can understand God with reason is fooling themselves.

And may I add - anyone who says they can understand God to these degrees should be able to explain how it is He created the world out of nothing.

Peace!!!

 

[Logically]

…as I said before, it does/did not answer the logical follow up questions. Had you said something like “I have nothing further to add” instead of “I will get back to you once I get caught up”, I surly would not have been expecting a reply.

…

There is a chart on page 302 of the 319 page document from 1963 “All Scripture is Inspired of God and Beneficial” that proves what professor Oskar Skarsaune states is false. This JW document clearly shows much confusion among the early Christians as to what the canon should be until Carthage in 397. Yes it does reference Carthage…

If this is true then you should have many other books in your bible and at least Hebrews, James, and Revelation should be taken out. That is, after all, what many of the communities believed and used in their worship service.
…
Its the follow ups that need to be answered.

Peace!!!

Very good adf417.

You have given me some good bits to muse on and research.

But alas, I have nothing more to add at this time. Ha!

Talk to you later and all the best…

Logically.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Matt. 28:19-20

You beat me to it

The Didache
“After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. . . . If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Didache 7:1 [A.D. 70]).

Ignatius of Antioch
“[T]o the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God” (Letter to the Ephesians 1 [A.D. 110]).

“For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit” (ibid., 18:2).

Justin Martyr
“We will prove that we worship him reasonably; for we have learned that he is the Son of the true God himself, that he holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third. For this they accuse us of madness, saying that we attribute to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all things; but they are ignorant of the mystery which lies therein” (First Apology 13:5–6 [A.D. 151]).

Theophilus of Antioch
“It is the attribute of God, of the most high and almighty and of the living God, not only to be everywhere, but also to see and hear all; for he can in no way be contained in a place. . . . The three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity: God, his Word, and his Wisdom” (To Autolycus 2:15 [A.D. 181]).

Irenaeus
“For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, the Father Almighty . . . and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit” (Against Heresies 1:10:1 [A.D. 189]).

And "I am ascending to my Father, to your God and my God.” (John 20:16)

:nope:

[bibledrb]John 20:16[/bibledrb]

 

[Logically]

…
I believe that JW’s are trying to understand the mysteries of God with their intellect and if so they won’t get too far.

You have the governing body

Very fair.
I guess both our governing body and the church councils feelo they are following the pattern of the “apostles and older men” who met in Jerusalem to discuss things at Acts 15:6-29.

And Pacloc accused me of “just repeating what the mighty governing body says.” (or words to that affect)

But I think a big difference is - is that everything our Governing Body explains to us is backed up solidly by the Bible.
Every week every congregtion of JW’s inn the world discusses an article from the WT in a question and answer format. (the same one all over the world - if translation permits)
In each of these articles there are an average of about 30 scriptures (or passages of scripture) related to the particular subject.
Some are read aloud by the congregation, some are quoted in the paragraph, and some are sited and the congregation is expected to have looked them up in their preparation.
That is alot of Bible instruction to squeeze into an hour.

(I’m sorry, I don’t know how many Bible scriptures are read and explained at your weekly sermons, nor if they come directly from the vatican or are put together by the priest )

My point is: This “Governing Body” bunch proves everything they say from the Bible. We get to understand why they have come to this conclusion. We don’t get told stuff and expected to “just have faith” it is true.

I like that.

So when they put out an article on the identity of God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit they have countless scriptures to draw on to show what Gods word says.

(for arguments sake) Imagine if the governing body put out a new understanding that “God is infact five people” Where would they get 30 scriptures from to support that? There isn’t even one!

So that is why I can’t accept the Trinity.

The Bible uses the word God about 7000 times, Jehovah nearly 7000, Jesus 1000, Christ 500 - I don’t know how to search how many times God is refereed to as “one” or how many times Jesus is refereed to as “the son of God”, or how many times both Father and son are mentioned in the same verse (though I think Father son and Holy spirit only once)

…yet the word Trinity appears 0.
No scripture (except one in 1 John which is now known to have been added 600 years later) explains that God is 3 in 1.

No mention! - Yet we are told this is “the central doctrine of Christianity”.

faith or not - doesn’t anyone else find that strange? )Our governing body wouldn’t be allowed to get away with it! )

.

Matt. 28:19-20
…
Yes, that is why we need faith. God is mysterious and any one who says they can understand God with reason is fooling themselves.

God Bless

Good.
An actual scripture from the Bible! May more come out to be diiscussed!

At Matt 28:19 Jesus says to “baptize people in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” (I think the only scripture in the Bible that lists these three in the same sentence, but I stand to be corrected)

Yet this is just a list of three sources. it doesn’t say they are the same!
Peter, James and John are listed in the same sentence dozens of times. But that doesn’t make them three in one does it?

Infact the very verse before contradicts the Trinity. Jesus just said: “All authority has been given me in heaven and on earth.”
Who gave this authority to him?
Obviously God, his father. So how can they be equal if the Father gave him this authority? He obviously didn’t have it before. = no Trinity.

God gave us the Bible for a reason. 2 Tim 3:16 says it is partly to “set things straight.”
So we should use the Bible to set disagreements straight shouldn’t we?

Thanks for your thoughts. Sorry if I have blabbed on too long.

 

[Logically]

…
:nope:

[bibledrb]John 20:16[/bibledrb]

Oh, sorry. Verse 17.

John20:17. Jesus saith to her: Do not touch me, for I am not yet ascended to my Father. But go to my brethren, and say to them: I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and your God.

So Jesus has a God, and he is the same one Mary has. = no Trinity.

Thanks for spotting that.

 

[Matt_Guitar_Man]

Hi Matt.
I know you to be quite scholar, so I was about to just say: “You would know more about this than me.” But I did a quick google search on Newton (which is often my scholarly limit ) and found some bits that I will quote.

“Sir Isaac Newton . . . was also eminent as a critic of ancient writings, and examined with great care the Holy Scriptures. What is his verdict on this point? ‘I find,’ says he, ‘more sure marks of authenticity in the New Testament than in any profane [secular] history whatever.’
S. Austin Allibone. The Union Bible Companion,

Wikipedia says:
According to most scholars, Newton was Arian, not holding to Trinitarianism.[9][22][23] ‘In Newton’s eyes, worshipping Christ as God was idolatry, to him the fundamental sin’.[24] … …A manuscript he sent to John Locke in which he disputed the existence of the Trinity was never published. …
…T.C. Pfizenmaier argued Newton was neither “orthodox” nor an Arian,[25] but that, rather, Newton believed both of these groups had wandered into metaphysical speculation
…
Newton spent a great deal of time trying to discover hidden messages within the Bible. After 1690, Newton wrote a number of religious tracts dealing with the literal interpretation of the Bible…
(end of wikipedia quote)

So rather than dismissing the Bibe as unreliable - Newton seems to be very interested in what it says. No doubt you have research that says otherwise. Wikipedia is just current majority opinion.

also on this site:

skyscript.co.uk/newton.html

…During his studies Newton had come to believe that the central doctrine of the church, the Holy and Undivided Trinity was a pagan corruption imposed on Christianity in the fourth century by Athanasius…
(notice, not - “the Bible was corrupted” - Logically )
…
Although these views make Newton a heretic from the perspective of established Christianity, he was in fact a fervent believer in the Bible. Newton’s laws of motion contradicted the accepted biblical doctrine in the same way that Galileo’s views had. But rather than contradicting the Bible, Newton believed that the Bible was accurate and that it was the interpretation of theologians that was wrong. He continued to study biblical prophecy until his death,

I disagree. But my research was brief.

But we are getting off track. The thread is “what is your take on JW’s” perhaps start another thread on “What did Sir Isaac think about the Trinity and the Bible?”

Enjoy your day.
Logically.

As I said Logically, he believed the New Testament although an authentic historical writing was a corrupted text, the most famous verse he used to demonstrate this was 1Jn 5:7. The interpolations were so many in his opinion, that the text was distorted to accommodate the theology of the Trinity, and that the text of the New Testament preserved by the Church was unreliable on this account.

Although these views have made Newton the darling of those sects that rely on their authenticity by insisting upon the theory of “The Great Apostasy” such as Seven Day Adventists and the Jehovah Witnesses who often quote his views to try and support their own, this quoting of Newton is mostly disingenuous. For example Newton was not an Arian in the same sense as the JW’s, he did not believe Christ was some sort of elevated being or “a god” or for that matter an angle, to Newton Christ was just another in a long line of prophets from the Hebrew religion.
It is also interesting that the JW will quote almost any secular scholars views ad fin tem when they appear to suite his purposes however he will also dismiss all secular opinions as being unreliable and “of the devil” when they are at cross purposes and will stubbornly assert the Watch Tower Governing Body opinion as the last word and only reliable opinion on the subject? Hardly an even and honest approach to any debate.

 

[adf417]

When people call JW’s Arians it makes me chuckle. Name calling is a tactic used when relying on evidence isn’t going to help their cause. We all remember that from the school yard.

That is why I used the word “seems” in my statement.

But now that you do claim no ties to Arian please, by all means, tell us what the differences are between Arians and JW’s. I have often wondered what the differences are. It would SEEM to me that your similarities in the belief of the deity of Christ would have you more fond of Arian than what you describe. Surly you view him as more in line with the JWs than any other Christian sect, right?

Peace!!!

 

[ShanPO]

My point is: This “Governing Body” bunch proves everything they say from the Bible. We get to understand why they have come to this conclusion. We don’t get told stuff and expected to “just have faith” it is true.

So when they completely change their view, that’s OK? When they say the world is going to end in 1914, or maybe in the 70’s (I don’t know the exact date) or whenever else they have definitively said it’s GOING TO HAPPEN, and we get that from the Bible, how is that really “proving” anything? All it proves, to me, is that they realize they screwed up, and try to cover their tracks by making it seem like it’s the regular Joe Schmo JW who’s at fault.

“What, you really believed that what we told you 3 weeks ago was going to happen was true? You really took us seriously on that? Oh well, we have NEW revalation from the Bible, and you shouldn’t have done all the things we told you to do anyway.”

Tell me that’s not how it works.

 

[fhansen]

What is your take on “Jehovah’s Witnesses” sect other than not considering JESUS as GOD?

Because I personally admire their ethics compared to some other Christian sects:

• Homosexual activity/same-sex marriages are forbidden.
• Abortion is considered a murder.
• Modesty in dress and grooming is frequently emphasized.
• Gambling, drunkenness, illegal drugs, and tobacco use are forbidden.
• Drinking of alcoholic beverages is permitted in moderation.

My only take on them that they emphasis on the name of GOD to be “Jehovah”, which I believe it should not, because GOD is universal, every nation could call Him by their native language!

There are some admirable things about them. They also seem to have a strong, supportive fellowship and, of course, they aren’t afraid to witness to their faith. But it doesn’t matter in the least how well a particular group may be doing some things well if the fullness of the faith isn’t contained in their religion. All religions have at least some truth.

Within the Catholic Church, all the various fruits of the Spirit have been demonstrated, some better, some worse at times over the centuries-it’s up to us what we’ll do because the Church’s doctrines are all spot-on due to being the historical church established by God at the beginning of Christianity, and this would include the EO Churches as well BTW. But once we stray away from that guaranteed authority there’s no way to ensure that our understanding and interpretations of Scripture will be correct. And if you take an objective look at the JWs theology and beliefs you’ll honestly wonder how they could come up with many of the most important ones-that’s what happened in my case anyway. Both doctrine and practices are important.

 

[Waynec]

But I think a big difference is - is that everything our Governing Body explains to us is backed up solidly by the Bible.

in heaven and on earth."
Who gave this authority to him?
Obviously God, his father. So how can they be equal if the Father gave him this authority? He obviously didn’t have it before. = no Trinity.

You are forgetting about the 2 natures of Jesus. Divine and human. You do believe that Jesus is divine don’t you? So Jesus here in his humanity did receive his authority from His Father.

{quote]God gave us the Bible for a reason. 2 Tim 3:16 says it is partly to “set things straight.”
So we should use the Bible to set disagreements straight shouldn’t we?
What about 2 Peter 1-2.

God Bless

[/QUOTE]

 

[pacloc]

catholic-forum.com/members/popestleo/antenicene.html

This should help see the lies the WT puts forward in their magazines about the Trinity and the Early Church. Someone has done a lot of research to expose them and show the truth.

Logically, please respond to whether or not you believe John 1:1 that Jesus is a god. How can you believe in two Gods?

 

[Logically]

Logically;11875801:

The same is true of the Catholic Church.
…

Most every word prayed in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass comes straight out of the bible. The priest gives a teaching on the readings for that day. The readings change every day and those of us who attend Mass daily get through almost all of the bible from attending Mass. No the Vatican has nothing to do with it. The priest uses the bible and reminds us of Catholic teaching in his homily…

So we are going to do this dance again? The apostles believed in the Trinity as did the early Church Fathers. …
Because it was believed and taught rom the time of the apostles. …

What about 2 Peter 1-2.

God Bless

Thanks for your reply.

Sorry, Do you mean 2 Peter 1:2? Or are you refering to the whole first two chapters of 2 Peter?

I see 2 Peter 1:2 says: “may undeserved kindness and peace be increased to you by accurate knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.”

So that scripture mentions both God and Jesus.
What am I missing. Do I have the right verse?

 

[Logically]

So when they completely change their view, that’s OK? When they say the world is going to end in 1914, or maybe in the 70’s (I don’t know the exact date) or whenever else they have definitively said it’s GOING TO HAPPEN, and we get that from the Bible, how is that really “proving” anything? All it proves, to me, is that they realize they screwed up, and try to cover their tracks by making it seem like it’s the regular Joe Schmo JW who’s at fault.

“What, you really believed that what we told you 3 weeks ago was going to happen was true? You really took us seriously on that? Oh well, we have NEW revalation from the Bible, and you shouldn’t have done all the things we told you to do anyway.”

Tell me that’s not how it works.

No. That’s not how it works.

 

[ShanPO]

No. That’s not how it works.

Then tell me how it works, because that’s pretty much the way I’ve seen it go down. If someone got a blood transfusion say 20 years ago, and was shunned because of it, will they be allowed back into the fold now because blood transfusions are acceptable? That’s the ultimate Roddy Piper move “Just when they think they have all the answers, I change the questions.”

 

[seanman611]

So when they completely change their view, that’s OK? When they say the world is going to end in 1914, or maybe in the 70’s (I don’t know the exact date) or whenever else they have definitively said it’s GOING TO HAPPEN, and we get that from the Bible, how is that really “proving” anything? All it proves, to me, is that they realize they screwed up, and try to cover their tracks by making it seem like it’s the regular Joe Schmo JW who’s at fault.

“What, you really believed that what we told you 3 weeks ago was going to happen was true? You really took us seriously on that? Oh well, we have NEW revalation from the Bible, and you shouldn’t have done all the things we told you to do anyway.”

Tell me that’s not how it works.

Also, don’t forget the flip flops on blood transfusions, which is/has been life and death for Jehovah’s Witnesses. bible.ca/jw-blood.htm

Also, Logically, I’d like to get your take on the false quotes and cooked sources in the “Should You Believe In the Trinity?” booklet. The pamphlet is full of quotes that are taken out of context, while others are chopped up until it looks like the source is in agreement with the Watchtower Org. Furthermore, some sources that are quoted cannot even be found. This is not only the case with the “Trinity” booklet, but this is true with most Watchtower Org publications. If what the men on the governing body teach is backed by the bible and so obvious, then why do they need to lie about and cook sources in order to back these claims up?

Please see the primary sources in their original context to see just how badly the Watchtower Org butchered them: searchingthescriptures.net/main_pages/answering_cults/jehovahs%20witnesses/examining-should_you_believe_in_the_trinity.htm

Thoughts?

 

[Lormar]

I just had two JWs this morning knock at my door and invite me to some presentation they are having on the 14th. They are often in my neighborhood and always come to my door. I often take their publication and read it.

Can someone here tell me what it is about them that attracts and holds such zealous members?

Edited to add that I just read the first few pages of this thread. They always seem to be so very nice and friendly, but I read here that it is all a facade to rope you in.

What is the best way to deal with them then? Take their publications? Just tell them “sorry, not interested”?