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

[Waynec]

o
I

What is more, even if John 1:1 says: “…and the Word was God.” it still doesn’t teach the Trinity.

 

[adf417]

Please, pretty please ask for a free Bible study when we next call.

When you prove the authority of your bible count me as #1 on the list.

Joke:
A Catholic, a Baptist, and A Jehovah Witness walk in to a bar - bartender asks “who’s interpretation is correct?”

Sorry - no punch line to this one.

Peace!!!

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Once again you sound like a child in your understanding of the Trinity. Please, pretty please look up the definition from the catechism or any early church father. You will see you are fighting against a made up version of the Holy Trinity that the watchtower has purposely misrepresented. THERE ARE 3 PERSONS NOT 1.

I got the same impression… Actually it’s eerily similar to having an argument with an immature teenager. You know, ignore all the facts and make silly comments and by any means necessary avoid reading/listening to things that prove them wrong…

Oh, and when trapped in an argument claim that they are being attacked and play the victim…

 

[Miserissima]

I got the same impression… Actually it’s eerily similar to having an argument with an immature teenager. You know, ignore all the facts and make silly comments and by any means necessary avoid reading/listening to things that prove them wrong…

Oh, and when trapped in an argument claim that they are being attacked and play the victim…

I say X. You say Y. We play “proof texts” and I throw everything but the kitchen sink, and when that doesn’t work, I bring up all the reasons why you’d be wrong based on propaganda. When I’m proven wrong, I simply say “sour grapes.” Wash, rinse, repeat. There have been more receptive fundamentalists on here asking about Marian doctrine.

But who cares? Is anyone going to bother reading them all and try to keep score?

Considering WTBS combs the most obscure writings of the Early Church Fathers and quotes them out of context, why not? Since your study focuses on perfect worship in spirit and truth, why not?

it shows is that the verse is not as easily translated into English as we might think,

No, really, it is. DelsonJacobs just did it, and in context, too.

(infact as you are probably aware, JW’s are far more likely to change their beliefs to suit the Bible than the other way around)

Not according to the recent WTBS “updates” that impact more than text.

What is more, even if John 1:1 says: “…and the Word was God.” it still doesn’t teach the Trinity. (Which is what this topic started as)

We could argue this one backwards and forwards until Armageddon, and still - there is no trinity taught here!
There are only two characters mentioned. God and the Word.
Regardless of what way we translate the verse, there are some confusing issues we have to turn to the entire context of the Bible to help us understand.

Interesting that the most basic teaching for understanding a scripture in context is reading at least seven verses before and seven verses after a verse. Why would John 1:1 be a figure of speech but verses 2-5 be literal?

Also, if JW’s wanted to take out references to Jesus being called Good in the Bible, they would have tampered with John20:28 where Thomas said: “My Lord and my God!”

I’m confused why you mentioned that because the JWs have their own interpretation of that verse, too.

 

[ShanPO]

I over heard something interesting while I was talking to myself.
may I share?

We all recognise figures of speech don’t we. If I said “don’t beat around the bush” or “he has his head in the sand” or “it’s raining cats and dogs” – you would all recognise a figure of speech and not take it literally.
“How can clouds hold cats and dogs!” would not be any ones reply. (if it was, we would write the poor fellow off as an idiot)

And the Bible contains many figures of speech too.
The name Jehovah is called “a fortress” in Psalms.
We are told “watch out for wolves in sheeps clothing” – figures of speech.

Where Jesus said “a man and his wife will become one flesh” or when he prayed for his followers “to be one” – No one takes this literally.
No one is trying to understand how multiple people are infact supposed to morph into one.

But here is the weird bit:
When Jesus says: “I and the Father are one” – suddenly the ability to recognise a figure of speech is gone!

Or when he said: “if you have seen me you have seen the Father." - Again, no figure of speech allowed. it must be totally literal!

Despite a thousand examples of Jesus and his Father being mentioned in a context that shows they are separate people, (don’t ask me to list them, you know I will )

• despite numerous visions in which prophets and apostles see God with Jesus standing separately at his right hand (incidentally, only ever two people in these visions, not three)
  -despite Jesus praying to God and saying “the Father sent me” and “the Father is greater” and all the rest (don’t make me list them!)
• despite all this suddenly people miss the figure of speech and insist Father and son are the same person!
  (I should clarify that. When I say “people”" I mean ones who want to believe the Trinity)

So if I say “my Wife and I are one” – no confusion. If Jesus says “my Father and I are one” – out come incomprehensible philosophical formulas!

Do you see my point?

Titles and descriptions of Jesus shows a similar lack of logic. Jesus is referred to in numerous ways in the Bible. He is called “the son of man”, “the Stone the builders rejected”, “the lamb of God” “the Word”…
– and no one looses sleep trying to nut out how Jesus is also a rock, or a sheep or a single syllable in a language. We all know these are figures of speech. Simple.

At John 1:1 “The Word” is an acceptable figure of speech for a spokesman or a messenger .
But in the same sentence - “a god” is not allowed to be a figure of speech for a mighty spirit creature!

“No way!” the Trinitarian cries: “Either join our team and say “God” or you have to take it literally and confess you think there are two gods! No middle ground allowed. And don’t you dare try and say “godlike” or “divine”! - So back to “God was with God and is God.” Sure that doesn’t make sense, but being incomprehensible suits a trinity belief much better.”

JW’s conclusion harmonises logic and the Bible, but the dominant church council in the chaotic 4th century voted for a trinity, so you are stuck with it.

And even if they win the argument, or more likely the JW gives up banging his head against a brick wall (there is another figure of speech for you) - John 1:1 calling Jesus God would only be collaborating evidence for the Trinity at best. It only mentions two, not three.

In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. This verse isn’t about establishing a Trinity, but allowing the reader to see that Jesus (the Word) was (is) God. You

Please explain to me how that is a figure of speech? A figure of speech is “On the baseball diamond, Babe Ruth was a god amongst men.” But actually attributing the quality of One (God) to Jesus is what that statement is doing.

You say “the dominant church council in the chaotic 4th century voted for a trinity, so you are stuck with it” and that’s fine. Where were the JW’s to counter that council? Are you saying the world had to wait 1600 years before someone came along and corrected their mistake? I’m sorry, but what kind of evil god would allow 1600 years of people to be wrong about him? Not the God I follow because as scripture says the gates of Hell shall not prevail over the Church he founded. 1600 years of absolute wrong seems to me like Hell prevailed.

I’ve been following this thread from the beginning, and have learned quite a bit, and actually hoped Logically would come back and answer some of the questions or “clear up misrepresentations” that have been tossed out, but when I read his posts, it only confirms more and more of what Delson has been telling us. He’s quick to toss things out but when confronted or challenged on them, he doesn’t respond or disappears. I would be more than happy to not say anything else on this thread and just allow Logically to refure all of Delson’s posts, but I don’t think he can, and I think in trying to do so, he would have to come to the realization that his “organization” has led him astray.

 

[Logically]

Logically;11885939:

It teaches that Jesus is the same substance as God and therefore is God. It also teaches that Jesus was with God before creation began and is not a created angel as the WT teaches.

It is certainly one way the scripture can be understood. You are right.

But it is clearly a scripture where there is a lot of debate about how it should be translated or understood. These range from “Jesus is God himself” , through “he is another god” , “he is like God” , to “he is a powerful spirit creature close to God.” Arguments are made for all.

What does God’s word say?

When there is confusion as to what a teacher means, a good way to clear up the confusion is to consider other things he said on the same subject.

In John the identity of Jesus is discussed often. John knew him! An actual eye witness who travelled with him for years.

If we could consider these other verses without pre-conceived ideas, surely God would be talking to us through his word, and help us to clarify the truth.
It is God’s word. What harm could it do?

I have engaged in a little project that I am happy to share if anyone cares. Here are the verses I found that mention Jesus and his Father when I scanned through John. (these include ones often used to support the trinity) there are some very interesting ones indeed.
I know it looks like a lot, but they are in order, so it is a simple matter of skipping from one to the next. Or if it is too much, just read every third or fourth one for a summary.

So without worrying about what Catechisims and Watchtower articles conclude: What does the Bible actually say?

John 1:1,2,3, 18, 29, 34, 49.
2:16, 3:2, 16, 34,35,
5:18,19, 26, 36, 43, 6:29, 44, 46, 69.
7:16, 17, 28, 33, 8:18, 28, 40, 49, 50, 54, 58.
9:30-33, 10:15, 17, 25, 29,30,33-38,
11:4, 21,22, 27, 41, 42, 12:13, 27, 28, 44, 45, 49,
13: 3, 31, 14:1, 6, 9-13, 16, 17, 20, 26, 31.
15:1, 9, 10, 15, 23, 24, 26, 16:10, 13, 25 – 28
17:1-8, 11, 21-23, 25. 19:7, 20:16, 17, 21, 28, 31.

If we read those verses we should get a far clearer picture of God and Jesus than going over and over the same verse.

 

[Logically]

…
You say “the dominant church council in the chaotic 4th century voted for a trinity, so you are stuck with it” and that’s fine. Where were the JW’s to counter that council? Are you saying the world had to wait 1600 years before someone came along and corrected their mistake? I’m sorry, but what kind of evil god would allow 1600 years of people to be wrong about him? Not the God I follow because as scripture says the gates of Hell shall not prevail over the Church he founded. 1600 years of absolute wrong seems to me like Hell prevailed.

Good reasoning. :thumbsup:Thank you.

Yet that is exactly what Jesus said would happen.
(Not that God would do it though, anymore than God is responsible for all the wars that have happened since then)

Matthew 13:24-30. shows a profound illustration and prophesy Jesus gave us.

*He presented another illustration to them, saying: “The Kingdom of the heavens may be likened to a man who sowed fine seed in his field. While men were sleeping, his enemy came and oversowed weeds in among the wheat and left. When the stalk sprouted and produced fruit, then the weeds also appeared. So the slaves of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow fine seed in your field? How, then, does it have weeds?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy, a man, did this.’ The slaves said to him, ‘Do you want us, then, to go out and collect them?’ He said, ‘No, for fear that while collecting the weeds, you uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and in the harvest season, I will tell the reapers: First collect the weeds and bind them in bundles to burn them up; then gather the wheat into my storehouse.’” *

But so as to leave no doubt about what he was talking about, we have recorded Jesus explanation also at Matthew 13:36-43.

Then after dismissing the crowds, he went into the house. His disciples came to him and said: “Explain to us the illustration of the weeds in the field.” In response he said: “The sower of the fine seed is the Son of man; the field is the world. As for the fine seed, these are the sons of the Kingdom, but the weeds are the sons of the wicked one, and the enemy who sowed them is the Devil. The harvest is a conclusion of a system of things, and the reapers are angels. Therefore, just as the weeds are collected and burned with fire, so it will be in the conclusion of the system of things. The Son of man will send his angels, and they will collect out from his Kingdom all things that cause stumbling and people who practice lawlessness, and they will pitch them into the fiery furnace. There is where their weeping and the gnashing of their teeth will be. At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father. Let the one who has ears listen.


Practically all the other writers of the New testament also refer to this turning away from the truth. Even Daniel the prophet refers to it. (I can find the scriptures if you want)

It wouldn’t be until “the harvest” that the truth would come to the fore again. (The harvest being the conclusion of the system Jesus said)
It is one of the few illustrations Jesus gave where he also gave a piece by piece explanation of what he was referring to.

Any thoughts?

 

[DelsonJacobs]

What is more, even if John 1:1 says: “…and the Word was God.” it still doesn’t teach the Trinity. (Which is what this topic started as)
We could argue this one backwards and forwards until Armageddon, and still - there is no trinity taught here!

The Catholic Church NEVER claims that John 1:1 teaches the Trinity. This is an invention of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

What the Catholic Church teaches is that John 1:1 reveals a sacred truth, namely that Jesus, the Word of God, is God. But we never say it teaches the entire Trinity in one verse.

Every time a Jehovah’s Witness brings this up–“This verse doesn’t teach there is a Trinity”–they are agreeing with what Catholics teach. It doesn’t teach a Trinity…It teaches PART of the Trinity, namely about the relationship between the Father and the Son.

So Logically’s point above is a moot point to raise because the claim that Logically keeps shouting “backwards and forwards until Armageddon” isn’t relative to what Catholics are saying.

Attributing an invented claim to Catholicism and repeatedly raising the same moot point does not an argument make.

 

[Logically]

Hi all.
I had better stop replying on the Trinity. I am getting “infractions” over my comments, so am obviously offending. that’s no good.
It is a subject that people get passionate about, so maybe I should leave it alone.

Apologies if in my ramblings I have touched a nerve or used phrases that have upset. That can hardly be called helpful.

I will try to show more respect.

Best regards.
Logically.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

Where Jesus said “a man and his wife will become one flesh” or when he prayed for his followers “to be one” – No one takes this literally.
No one is trying to understand how multiple people are infact supposed to morph into one.

That’s odd. As a Roman Catholic and a Jew I believe Jesus’ words are literal. I believe the two “become one flesh.”

Jesus didn’t say, however, they became one person or one human being, did he? No. He said they now “become one flesh.”

Man and wife “become one flesh” emotionally, spiritually, and physically, don’t they?

When a man and his wife create life through their union, doesn’t the new life, the child they produce, is it not a union of the two separate entities? Don’t they now create a new person who is physical evidence of their “one flesh” union? DNA would support Jesus’ words that the child now has the features of both man and wife unified into one flesh.

Logically denies this truth of Scripture and physical reality. Does anyone want to join a religion that denies Jesus’ words and reality?

God Greater than the Two

If two persons, the one person of man and the second person of wife, can make “one flesh,” is not God greater than man?

Since the “one flesh” of humanity is made up of two separate persons, a man and a wife, cannot the God who is greater than humans be made up of three separate Persons? If God is greater than us, why can’t he be more than us?

Humans:
ONE FLESH = The Person of Man + The Person of his Wife

YHWH:
ONE GOD = The Person of the Father + The Person of the Son + The Person of the Holy Spirit

Is the man the same person as his wife? No.

Is the Father the same Person as the Son or the Spirit? No.

Is the man the same ONE FLESH as his wife? Yes.

Is the Father the same ONE GOD as his Son and the his Spirit? Yes.

Is the man a separate FLESH and his wife a separate FLESH? No, for that would make two FLESH, but together they are ONE. Two PERSONS make up ONE FLESH.

Is the Father a separate God from Jesus and the Spirit? No, for that would make three GODS. There is only ONE GOD, and Three PERSONS make up this ONE GOD.

A single book may have THREE parts, and each part of the book may be a separate chapter, but you wouldn’t argue that you have THREE BOOKS would you? No, of course not!

You have ONE BOOK made up of THREE CHAPTERS.

ONE FLESH made up of TWO PERSONS, man and wife.

ONE GOD made up of THREE PERSONS, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

Hi all.
I had better stop replying on the Trinity. I am getting “infractions” over my comments, so am obviously offending. that’s no good.
It is a subject that people get passionate about, so maybe I should leave it alone.

Apologies if in my ramblings I have touched a nerve or used phrases that have upset. That can hardly be called helpful.

I will try to show more respect.

Best regards.
Logically.

You have not touched on a nerve. You are not offending. You are just incorrect.

There is a difference from saying something that is false, which you have, and saying something insulting, which you have not.

 

[Nicea325]

Hi all.
I had better stop replying on the Trinity. I am getting “infractions” over my comments, so am obviously offending. that’s no good.
It is a subject that people get passionate about, so maybe I should leave it alone.

Apologies if in my ramblings I have touched a nerve or used phrases that have upset. That can hardly be called helpful.

I will try to show more respect.

Best regards.
Logically.

JW theology is seriously flawed. The Trinity is easily poven by Scripture. Problem is that JW’s are to blind to accept it due to their late and novel beliefs. Jesus a perfect creature? How can any perfect save humanity from their sins?

No creature…and I mean…none…can save.

 

[DelsonJacobs]

It wouldn’t be until “the harvest” that the truth would come to the fore again. (The harvest being the conclusion of the system Jesus said)

Any thoughts?

The harvest wouldn’t be in the future, Logically. The harvest was NOW when Jesus came to earth. Is it not written at John 4:35-38?

Do you not say that there are yet four months before the harvest comes? Look! I say to you: Lift up your eyes and view the fields, that they are white for harvesting. Already the reaper is receiving wages and gathering fruit for everlasting life, so that the sower and the reaper may rejoice together. For in this respect the saying is true: One is the sower and another the reaper. I sent you to reap what you did not labor on. Others have labored, and you have entered into the benefit of their labor.

How could Christ send out people into a harvest if it was yet to occur? You are mistaken, because you don’t know the Scriptures and what they teach.

I am not angry and you have not offended, you are just mistaken. You need to wake up from your mistaken views. You are now starting to contradict the Bible you claim to believe in.

 

[Nicea325]

I over heard something interesting while I was talking to myself.
may I share?

We all recognise figures of speech don’t we. If I said “don’t beat around the bush” or “he has his head in the sand” or “it’s raining cats and dogs” – you would all recognise a figure of speech and not take it literally.
“How can clouds hold cats and dogs!” would not be any ones reply. (if it was, we would write the poor fellow off as an idiot)

And the Bible contains many figures of speech too.
The name Jehovah is called “a fortress” in Psalms.
We are told “watch out for wolves in sheeps clothing” – figures of speech.

Where Jesus said “a man and his wife will become one flesh” or when he prayed for his followers “to be one” – No one takes this literally.
No one is trying to understand how multiple people are infact supposed to morph into one.

But here is the weird bit:
When Jesus says: “I and the Father are one” – suddenly the ability to recognise a figure of speech is gone!

Or when he said: “if you have seen me you have seen the Father." - Again, no figure of speech allowed. it must be totally literal!

Despite a thousand examples of Jesus and his Father being mentioned in a context that shows they are separate people, (don’t ask me to list them, you know I will )

• despite numerous visions in which prophets and apostles see God with Jesus standing separately at his right hand (incidentally, only ever two people in these visions, not three)
  -despite Jesus praying to God and saying “the Father sent me” and “the Father is greater” and all the rest (don’t make me list them!)
• despite all this suddenly people miss the figure of speech and insist Father and son are the same person!
  (I should clarify that. When I say “people”" I mean ones who want to believe the Trinity)

So if I say “my Wife and I are one” – no confusion. If Jesus says “my Father and I are one” – out come incomprehensible philosophical formulas!

Do you see my point?

Titles and descriptions of Jesus shows a similar lack of logic. Jesus is referred to in numerous ways in the Bible. He is called “the son of man”, “the Stone the builders rejected”, “the lamb of God” “the Word”…
– and no one looses sleep trying to nut out how Jesus is also a rock, or a sheep or a single syllable in a language. We all know these are figures of speech. Simple.

At John 1:1 “The Word” is an acceptable figure of speech for a spokesman or a messenger .
But in the same sentence - “a god” is not allowed to be a figure of speech for a mighty spirit creature!

“No way!” the Trinitarian cries: “Either join our team and say “God” or you have to take it literally and confess you think there are two gods! No middle ground allowed. And don’t you dare try and say “godlike” or “divine”! - So back to “God was with God and is God.” Sure that doesn’t make sense, but being incomprehensible suits a trinity belief much better.”

JW’s conclusion harmonises logic and the Bible, but the dominant church council in the chaotic 4th century voted for a trinity, so you are stuck with it.
And even if they win the argument, or more likely the JW gives up banging his head against a brick wall (there is another figure of speech for you) - John 1:1 calling Jesus God would only be collaborating evidence for the Trinity at best. It only mentions two, not three.

The BIGGEST LIE THE JW ORGANIZATION LIKES TO PRESENT TO THE WORLD! Stop feeding off a lie invented by your leaders. History does not support your organization!

 

[adf417]

You have not touched on a nerve. You are not offending. You are just incorrect.

There is a difference from saying something that is false, which you have, and saying something insulting, which you have not.

Maybe he is offending and we just don’t know it. Kinda like maybe we worshiping things and we just don’t know it.

Peace!

 

[Miserissima]

So, I’m at a loss. logically refuses to discuss the Trinity because of infractions, so what’s the next topic?

 

[DelsonJacobs]

I don’t want people reading this to get the wrong idea.

I can’t believe that I, a Catholic, have to do this, but I am going to defend the Jehovah’s Witnesses due to something Logically has written here.

The official teaching of the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses regarding "man and wife’ becoming “one flesh” is NOT what Logically states.

Jehovah’s Witnesses, like Catholics, believe that the union of man and wife into “one flesh” is a physical reality as well as a spiritual and figurative one.

I also don’t want people or other JWs reading this to conclude that Logically is currently offering a good example of his religion. While many I know have, like anyone else, transgressed from time to time, most are obedient to instruction from the Governing Body.

Most would never argue or participate in a forum like Logically has. As I’ve pointed out before from their own source, regardless if a so-called “apostate” is present or not, Witnesses do not believe in joining, let alone participating in non-approved websites like Catholic forums. They believe in the sanctity of marriage and the “one flesh” union wholeheartedly. Some are even able to stick to the point in a discussion and not hop around as he has.

Catholics accept good and truth where ever it may be found. We also acknowledge that people will stick by their convictions, regardless if they agree with what we do. That’s only normal. A religion with high regard for Scripture is true blessing, even if it is not in full communion with the Church.

Why Logically may not have been currently giving the best of examples of a Jehovah’s Witness in this circumstance, nobody is perfect. I also know he is not prepared for much we are saying because he doesn’t have an honest exposure to what Catholics believe and the extent of our religious education. He believes only what he is told to believe about us. He does not know these things from walking among us, living among us, seeing and feeling our world.

Logically is also not evil nor condemned. Mistaken, yes, but one of our separated brethren nonetheless. I am also sure he is not always giving a bad example too.

Logically, instead of offering us more Scriptures and arguments, why not go back and read the Greek textual information I have supplied. Read that, check it not with books but by finding actual Biblical scholars. You can email any one of them or call them on the phone or visit the closest university to you. Make sure you get the (name removed by moderator)ut of several and see whether or not what I’ve written is true compared to what you believe.

Get your nose out of Watchtower books and visit the Promised Land. Walk by the Jordan, live and eat with the people, visit the Western Wall, touch it.

Instead of preaching at Catholics, come and visit with them during Mass, or stop by your nearest Catholic charity center and offer your strength to feed the hungry, comfort the sick, dress the poor. Get your hands dirty like we do in the ministry.

But don’t preach things your religion doesn’t teach. Don’t get into discussions with people unless you are willing to respond to each and every point.

And don’t call people “swine,” especially Jews of Sephardic ancestry. If you don’t know how anti-semitic that is and how much reproach you have brought upon the Witnesses by using that term against a Hebrew from Spain, you need to look up the term “Marranos.” It was more than offensive to do that, it was evil. Please don’t do that again. I am sure you did it without knowledge.

 

[Waynec]

I for one am enjoying this thread especially the bible lessons we get from Delson. I have learned a lot.

Thanks Delson

 

[Logically]

The BIGGEST LIE THE JW ORGANIZATION LIKES TO PRESENT TO THE WORLD! Stop feeding off a lie invented by your leaders. History does not support your organization!

Easy with the tone my friend.

I would get infracted for saying things like that!

 

[Logically]

…
And don’t call people “swine,” especially Jews of Sephardic ancestry. If you don’t know how anti-semitic that is and how much reproach you have brought upon the Witnesses by using that term against a Hebrew from Spain, you need to look up the term “Marranos.” It was more than offensive to do that, it was evil. Please don’t do that again. I am sure you did it without knowledge.

Oh dear. My humblest apologies on that one.

I was using the analogy Jesus taught warning us to not spend time or effort if someone doesn’t appreciate what you say.

Nothing was further from my mind than any racial or personal insult.

Apologies again.