Gnosis Pithos

In general, all names or labels, etiquette that have connections to Jesus way of teaching and living is given by people of 1. century or later. Jesus had not give any name to his own "movement". And if he organized something that has been, sending to preaching, nothing else. 
 
No problem! But it is need to understand how first Christ followers, as Paul who wrote many things about "organizing" in fact imitate Jews congregation that God rejected in the same time. Because they, first christians, was in fact Jews people, and they technically replicate religious system in which they lived. I the same time they tried to integrate NEW Teachings from his Master. New teachings that has been "apostate teaching" according to Jewish Clergy and Mosaic Law.
 
You Anna make complain if I find only one example in Bible :))) Maybe i am not reading enough to find more examples, heehe. Ok, i have again just one bible report on this.  The evildoer who was hang beside Jesus have no one of preconditions that JW said is crucial for salvation. Bible study, changing bad deeds to good deeds, prayers, congregational meetings, baptism, going to preaching and many other rules and commands that has to be obeyed.. He do only one thing, just said; "I believe!" So if Jesus accepted just words why you or other JW teaching how this is not enough?  
    One report is enough if you believe that is inspired and truthful and that all Word is beneficial. OT and NT. I have permission to called it "old" because i as people from "Gentile" have no obligation to follow or to be in obey to  any of Mosaic law and command. So, i am free to consider and accept it or to be critical in my thinking about OT. The same is with NT also. Because, as i mentioned before, there is some "principles" or teachings that has their roots in OT congregations and Law. And as Jesus teaches, his disciples are not under obligation to obey and follow The Law. But in 1 century first congregation done just same mistake JW doing today, replicate OT Law in Christian congregation.  It is little delicate to discuss on this because it is tricky to see what is problem in fact. And my english is not enough also. Thanks to all who are patient with my grammar and all mistakes in writing :)) 

Anna, if by "have to become Christians" you thought on obligation that person become part of organized religion, in your case JWorg, or in case of other believers, Catholic or Adventist and so on... than i will not be so sure about that. 
Even in case that somebody became member of "only true religion" aka JWorg, that not be assurance for salvation, as you very well quoted Jesus words, “Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ ...” so we can come to conclusion that is Gods choice to whom he give "salvation", no matter is person or not part of JWorg.
Yes i have one fine bible example to support my view. Naaman, commander of army, gentile, idol worshiper, get salvation from JHVH without any BUT in spiritual, religious or moral proviso. Only BUT was about in what river to take a bath. After that Naaman recognize JHVH as  "only God" but there is no report he became "proselyte", worshiper of JHVH, left his family or nation or position as commander. He has some conscious dilemmas, it is explained in  5:18, but even that this was not problem for JHVH that Naaman make worship to idols. JHVH never, according to Bible reports, say something against Naaman or give any conclusion about that matter. So, he gave freedom to us to made some conclusion :)))))   
 
  He have hard job  

Mr. Rook: Satan also does field service.  And he does not count his hours either.  In fact he is just happy when he can get others destroyed.  What is your MO?
You act true to form to place a whole number of old destructive themes on here so we have to defend these all over again.  You are really tiresome in your OCD!  This is like a recurring theme from a groundhog nightmare movie - your wild accusations with wild words which are so baseless! LOL - You test our patience to the limit! If I was one of the modern youth at Yale  university I would have needed a trigger warning!
I refer to my old (long) discussions with you about the blood issue. How my own baby SURVIVED because she DID NOT receive blood when she had her cancer.  The surgery took the WHOLE DAY and it looked like she was going to die... and how she healed much faster after her blood stabilized and .........how many people die from blood but it is not put on their death certificates as anaphylactic shock... We have been though all this before!!
 
 

How about that ... I have the answers even before you ask the questions ..... !

you are right, Abraham was referring to the only one born in his household. That was Eliezar, but God told Abraham that his heir would be from his own body (verse 4). So it was Sarah who plotted to have offspring through Hagar to help fulfill what God had promised. This child  would be from Abraham's own body, but God had a different plan. It was to be through Sarah (the barren woman) and not through Hagar (the bondwoman), as Galatians 4 ties directly with the Genesis account. 

I understand Gnosis Pithos, that you disagree with what I wrote by your downvote, it doesn't matter about votes to me. What I would like from you though, is a discussion as to why you disagree. Please include scripture for support of your position. 

Thanks for your ability to notice, to see, to understand and have good, accurate perception on WT GB manipulation they doing  with the "help" of Bible, Jesus and JHVH. They made one explanation that suites to them for reason of "daily politics theme in regard to so called apostates"  with two confusing verses that belong to so different time events and reasons of why it was told to Israel.
In fact GB put JHVH and Jesus on opposite camps. Jesus said, who see me see father... i am not telling nothing that my father not telling...and similar". But here, for need to give lesson to JW members, WT GB followers, they said how OT words have more power than NT words. Despite the fact how that same JHVH prophesied that he will made New Law in Heart of people not on stone or paper. But no, GB stick with OT "stone heart" and not on NT "spirit heart" that is not bond to written law, regulations, paragraphs, rules ....... from human. 
You point very well on GB discrepancy. I will continue with comments on this part from WT magazine paragraph; .... "Jesus encouraged his followers to love their enemies, but God's Word also says to "hate what is bad." When a person persists in a way of badness after knowing what is right, when the bad becomes so ingrained that it is an inseparable part of his make-up..."
1 )Jesus IS GOD'S WORD :))) so this word BUT have no place in  GB interpretation. 
2) Second, they dare to put themselves as God. God is able to see in deep things of "heart and kidneys" , but here GB said that they know what is with person and made final judgement about "bad is ingrained" in person's heart with no hope to change. This is blasphemy, GB put themselves in Judge Throne and suggest that all average JW member have also the same right and power to analysed other people heart and make own judgement what would be future of that person. Idiotic premise. 
Tragedy and comedy in one     
 

I believe that his name means "God his help" or "his help is God"
yes, I agree. It is a reference to Moses coming down from Mt. Sinai and the covenant established
 
So with that being said, we are left with the other covenant mentioned in Galatians 4. Of that group :
25 Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. 27 For it is written,
“Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear;
    break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor!
For the children of the desolate one will be more
    than those of the one who has a husband.”
This 2nd covenant group will outnumber those of the 1st covenant and will be of the Jerusalem above, which comes down from Heaven and resides upon the Earth (Revelation 21:10)
Do you agree with this? 

It is very nice that you put two translations of same verse, perhaps it will be good to use more of it. Because NWT have some err. 
it is not the same when NWT say - "obey your leaders" but Jesus said one is your leader, (so this is very big err in NWT), and if we hear "have confidence" NIV, but in all that one thing is more important - elders have to earn that trust from the people.
BUT my prime reason to respond on your comment above was this: It is not matter if  "one brings division into the church", in fact it is good to put on test and fire human doctrines, AND JESUS SUPPORT THAT TOO. YOU ASK HOW? READ THE BIBLE PLEASE. JESUS SAID: 
34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn
“‘a man against his father,
    a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36     a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’
37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it. – Jesus (Matthew 10:34-38)
According to this i am afraid that you are not familiar with "bible  principles, prophesies, teachings and many more". :))))

 

Dark, anti-religious poetry does not make one a Satanist. I think it was best explained in a couple of short reviews for a book currently for sale on Am-a-zon called, "Was Karl Marx a Satanist?"
Marx was an atheist Jew. He neither believed in the Christian conception of Satan, nor the Anton LeVay concept of Satan. The author offers no evidence, confusing mere hostility toward religion with Satanism, and offers some syntax-related conspiracy theories. "This sad book deosn't have any literary qualities whatsoever. This is pure Anti-semetic drivel full of ultra christian rhetoric from the extreme right. Marx was a philosopher and an idealist, this book doesnt examine him in anyway whatseoever it just descends into religious rants." By the way, you have got to be the most interesting person to read on this forum and I always enjoy your politically-oriented comments. You do not come at the world's issues with the typical Eurocentric myopia that drives so many others (and which usually drives Adventist-style prophetic explanations, for that matter). Naturally, I disagree with a lot of what you say, too, but this doesn't much change the overall value of hearing your opinion on things.

Do the "other religions destroy whole families to chastise one errant congregant?
Do the other religions require children to commit ritual medical suicide?
Do other religions have their congregants IN A LIFE BOAT with so many patches it looks covered in post-it-notes?
Inquiring minds want to know!

I found the article, and read several of the other ones, too. (At least in a Google Translation from Italian to English.) I thought that most of your articles were very clear, and I appreciate that you are asking good questions about the many gaps and inconsistencies in our current explanations. Since Daniel is a book that many of us have just recently been reading in our Bible reading schedules, I think a separate topic would be great and timely. It would have to be under "Controversial Posts" because, of course, even the potential existence of gaps and inconsistencies is something that many of us must deny.
I have not yet come up with a good explanation that resolves all the gaps, although, the vast majority of them are automatically resolved by just accepting certain verses at face value, instead of imposing unlikely interpretations of them. Still, prophecy in Daniel, Ezekiel and Revelation are some of the most intriguing and I have not considered any of my digging to be conclusive. I can tell you have put a lot of thought and time into understanding them through scriptural references. I must tell you right from the start that my approach is similar, in always using other scriptures to find explanations, or just admit that we won't know if no specific scriptural support can be found. Still, even though you apparently think in the same terms, I can tell that we will still disagree on most of our current opinions. Of course, different opinions are just fine with me . . . so I still think a further discussion is worth the while.  

Those famous words about god's impartiality = rain and sun to all people. It is only a basic illustration that shows how God's impartiality is unlimited. And he does not look at race, social status, ...... and affiliation with religion. Why you skip religion???? Did not Jesus show impartiality in every way to "gentiles" to people of other religion?? How can you talk about impartiality of God and then you use word BUT??? If you are impartial then you can not be that with But. "I will help you but...I will love you but...I will take care of you but....I will give my life for you but.......Anna can you not see nonsense?  There is no impartiality if you set the condition, proviso, stipulation. Story about Samaritan going further in lightening what mean impartiality, to love people of other religion, nation, to showing compassion, doing good for stranger from you not expecting nothing in return. With other words, without any BUT. 
You rely too much on old patterns. You forget that Jesus changed all this. He brought completely different things. And you want to go back to what He left. He does not seek an organization. Jesus collects his flock. His flock is not in the church, in the building. His flock is not in organized religion. His instructions are not listed in the law, in the Charter of WT corporation or in Charter of every JW congregation, in the books, and in the journals and magazines. His "law", his spirit and love He writing directly in people's heart, not looking who is who. And when He touched person, "repentance", and not only repentance, will occur in that special, unique moment of very soul, in the time of silence or in a time of scream, in a time of tears or in a time of empties. And will change us. In this or that direction.  

I am very sure how similar or the same view as you expressed with this sentence many other people have too. If "spiritual education that JW received in WTis the best in the World, than it would be expected, i would expected, higher level of contemplation and "spiritual maturity", and not so simplified "not my business" attitude.
If you David, are one of JW then by WT and Bible teaching in NT you have to be interest in talking to people of opposite view and "argue" or as WT Reasoning book in it title have word , you need to "reasoning" with them and to help them and to rescue them from false religion and lies they think are true, from satan philosophy and wrong expectations of future. If you are not JW, receive my apologize. But nevertheless, are you or not JW, it is good for soul to develop more compassion and interest in people, at least, to have better understand of people behaviour :)))
Here you need to have attitude "not my business". Because it is JHVH business to open people's mind and heart and NOT YOURS  it is of God's concern how people would interpret events in their lives. As it also case with JW members who interpret events in the way that suits to them. :))))))))  with help of GB.
Is this really as far as you can go in mediate about God's impartiality??????????    
Are you kidding me David? WT publications are full of experience about "worldly" people who prayed to "GOD" not knowing his name, not say "in Jesus name, amen", and not knowing nothing about "harmony in principles and plan", and Bible have examples too about people who prayed to God and He listen to them and helped them, despite how  they were "Gentiles". Ohhh man, if this "requirements", formalities which man has to satisfy before God in order that God could hear him, than all people who are not praying by JW model will never be heard by God, and they have never been heard in the past. Unbelievable :))))))))))))  

You are quite correct, God is impartial and accepts every human, regardless of race or social status, "who fears him and does what is right". This brings us to the usual argument about what it means to do what is right, and in whose eyes. In other words can it be said that religion, just like race or social status does not matter to God either? The Bible seems to indicate that it does matter to God. It indicates that the impartiality does have a condition attached to it. And that is the whole point of "he is patient with you because he does not desire anyone to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance". Then what does repentance mean? Who sets that standard? God does of course and he lets people know what these standards are through the pages of the Bible. 
That being said, just because Witnesses get all involved with their "own" problems, doesn't mean they do not have compassion with people of other faiths. It is understandable that they will focus on their brothers in the faith first though.
I know it's the "fashion" now for many to believe that ALL Christians in any denominations are acceptable to God as long as they live  a morally clean life and try to do good to others. And that is fine by me because who am I to judge? BUT, I also believe that God has not abandoned his pattern of having a people, a group, unitedly worshiping together like he did in ancient times, separate from the world around them, but this time from every "tribe and nation" not just the Jews. The Scriptures do indicate this on a number of occasions when referencing spiritual Israel, and those who would attach themselves to them as "foreigners" or "other sheep" to make one flock, not individuals standing by themselves out of all the various denominations of Christendom....

I agree that it is a red flag if we do not cooperate. (Although you weren't clear on who you meant by "them.")
But the second part of what you said there might be ambiguous. Did you mean it is a red flag if you do call them rulers, or a red flag if you do not call them rulers? I assume you meant the organizing shepherds who care for us in the new system. But "them" in the quote above appears to speak of "red flags" in the present. This is why I'm confused as to whether you might be saying it's a red flag now to not call them rulers.

Your take on this is interesting. I agree that there is a gap in the Watchtower's reasoning here. This was just barely touched upon at the convention this summer. I watched your video but didn't go to your site. Can you say what you think is a more likely view of the King of the North and South in your opinion?

But is it true?
 

Others may not be commissioned by GOD, but they still have eyes and ears

And that faith is not blind either...

I never have supported a false claim about the Watchtower's statements in 1989. And I don't plan on starting to support any such false claims now.

The secret caption is hidden in the file name ....

It is not a conspiracy theory. Just look what happened to me:

 
Stuck in an evil time warp. At last I understand.

That's even worse! You think that the real reason the correction was made was because they understood the potential that a software glitch would have made us revert back to the end of the 19th century, doomed to repeat the last 100 years like a "Groundhog Day" for centuries instead of days. All I can say is what you said . . .
 

It works for me. I like it.
Or one could just say 'they changed that.' They have never said they don't. Everyone knows Jehovah's Witnesses have thought Armageddon is just around the corner for a long while. It is. It simply turns out that it is one heckuva corner. But there is no question that this human experiment with self-rule will not turn out well.