Space Merchant

This is tragic. This is coming from someone who got into Spider-man and X-Men when I first came to America as a child. The concern also prior to his death, there was talk about mistreatment and a woman trying to get money from him back in April I believe regarding sexual assault. The man has already had issues with his greedy daughter and a list of other things, but what kept him going was his fans.

who sees see what is not possible to see :)))
For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
"inspired"
"motivated"
"carried along by"
:))
At least four-five spirits are in existence and have influence:
 1)JHVH spirit   2)Jesus spirit   3) Holy spirit    4) Devil spirit    5))Human spirit   
So, we are living in a World/Worlds with so many INSPIRATION and INSPIRED persons :))))

I am referring to when the cross not even being considered in the church of Christendom until the days of Constantine whereas he himself during the Battle of the Milvian Bridge had a vision, had seen a cross in the sky. It is said that the vision was instructing him to fight in the name of Christ, with his soldiers’ shields bearing the symbol of Christ. On the other side of the spectrum, the writer Eusebius, an apologist of Constantine, described the event in the Life of Constantine, which he wrote after Constantine’s death. Eusebius wrote that Constantine saw a vision of a cross rather than the letters of Christ. That he saw with his own eyes the trophy of a cross of light in the heavens, above the sun, and bearing the inscription, which says conquer by this. At the sight of this he himself was struck with amazement, and his whole army also, which followed him on this expedition, and witnessed the miracle, according to Eusebius.
 
There is more information out there, but I'd have to look some more for it.

This is where you are twisting this, they never admit to being inspired prophets, and I am sure all the facts provided to you several times before thus proofs this point.
The Holy Spirit did not die, it was the Christ who did, but only made alive because God's hand in Jesus' resurrection.

@Witness I will ask you a 3rd time. Give me the actual claim that they said they were inspired prophets.
I stated before twisting things in your favor does not equate to the claim of which you are accusing them of, I asked for inspired prophets, you bring up prophet-like organization when it is already know most Non-Trinitarians claim they are the True Church, but we have yet to see JWs, or ANY non-Trinitarian make claim to inspiration.
So I will ask you, @Srecko Sostar and @JOHN BUTLER
You all agree to the claim of which you profess that they inspired prophets, now I ask you, where did they make this claim?
And by the way, what you posted has been debunked just as the whole trust funds thing.
That being said, the claim of which I am asking you of regarding inspired prophets - I wait for from you - Witness, otherwise you are in deception by your own hand.
The fact no Anti-Trinitarian ever made that claim makes you far more than a liar than the doctrine that formed long ago in the Council.
Indeed, the next time you feel the need to mix, twist Strong's in your favor, perhaps do so to someone who does not know that information, let alone you making the assuming somehow God sent Satan to deal with Egyptians or trying to justify your belief in Man's Doctrine rather than God.

@Jack Ryan Fighting for religious freedom has nothing to do with voting. Granted this is Russia, JWs are not only allowed to vote, they are kept away from voters because of suspected influence of neutrality, mainly for the fact that there is a HUGE amount of Russians who are Anti-Kremlin/RoC, which resulted in them being called heroes, for said heroes are targeted, hence the various websites having the pictures and information of people as if they are targets for the hunt should the situation call for it.

No not at all. Context is everything.

I think this point showed excellent insight. I wondered if this is what you meant from the start. The very context shows that the type of leadership in this case is more like the local elders rather than the far-away GB:
(Hebrews 13:7) . . .Remember those who are taking the lead among you, who have spoken the word of God to you, and as you contemplate how their conduct turns out, imitate their faith. However, I wouldn't get too hung up on variations in translations, or changes from one NWT to a newer version. As JWs, we are always happy to quote other translations that support our view of Scriptures. There are always several different ways to translate something and it doesn't mean that one is right and one is wrong. They could both be right. Often there are two ways to say the exact same thing. Often there are slight differences, and sometimes larger differences in meaning, and a translator is obligated to take an educated guess.
The "nakedness" vs "lacking clothing" discussion is an example of that. The word for nakedness in the original Greek is "gymnos." (Strong's Greek #1131)  It's the same word from which we get "gymnasium" because sports in the Greek/Roman world were often performed naked (and sometimes nearly so). This reminds me that I gave a funeral talk in Manhattan in 2013 on the day of the Annual Meeting, and the elder from Bethel (Patterson) who was supposed to give the talk had to leave early for his seat in Jersey City. I already had a copy of the NWT 2013 Revised on PDF, and was under strict orders not to share this fact with anyone, not even my wife. But I cheated a bit. The funeral was attended by a lot of her "worldly" neighbors in addition to brothers and sisters. She had been well-known as a Dorcas-like sister who actually had bought me a new warm coat when I first came to Bethel in 1976. I wanted to use the example in James 2:15, but I always hated the fact that it said "naked" there, and I especially didn't want to read it that way in front of non-Witnesses:
(James 2:15-16) 15 If a brother or a sister is in a naked state and lacking the food sufficient for the day, 16 yet a certain one of YOU says to them: “Go in peace, keep warm and well fed,” but YOU do not give them the necessities for [their] body, of what benefit is it? So I used the 2013 NWT Revised, against orders, but no one called me out on it. Because no one else should have known anyway. Besides, the new Bible was to be released in just a few hours:
(James 2:15, 16) 15 If a brother or a sister is lacking clothing and enough food for the day, 16 yet one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but you do not give them what they need for their body, of what benefit is it? The first is actually a little more accurate from a literal point of view. But the second is probably more accurate from a practical point of view, as it's hard to imagine someone coming into the KH completely naked.
The word "torture stake" vs "stake" is a good point. One is for understanding and the other more literal. A better example might be the word "impaled" which was completely wrong in its most common connotations. That was fixed in 2013.
Some other points are still questionable, and the translators might still wonder whether they may have had a better choice in the old version of the NWT. Here's an example, I wanted to share earlier when discussion the term "illiterate" with @Outta Here so I'll use this excuse to bring it up now:
(John 7:15) 15 Therefore the Jews fell to wondering, saying: “How does this man have a knowledge of letters, when he has not studied at the schools?” (pre-2013 NWT) (John 7:15) 15 And the Jews were astonished, saying: “How does this man have such a knowledge of the Scriptures when he has not studied at the schools?” (2013 NWT)
The older version could be saying something specific about literacy, where the second is referring to knowledge of Scripture itself.
 

Granted I had witnessed and had experienced an aftermath of both  shamans and Witch-Doctors, they do not take money, or bribes. The only thing they care for is blood, death and power, for money is meaningless to them. Actually followers of the Devil believe they can gain power from him which puts others as risk, a very high risk. There are some things taking place that will not allow you to sleep peacefully at night.
That being said, nothing cannot bring down the apostolic church, many have tried, no one can stop it, and her people. There are those for God and those against him and those against him will be met with the Sword of the Christ and the army of which God gave him.
So anything regarding occultism, dark magic and or blood rituals, etc. All this will be purged from the earth for good.

But the irony here is we know Jehovah's Witnesses, Bible Student at the time, believed Jesus to become King and both the existing and non-existing Christian denominations stood by the Bible Students. Furthermore, it is not unknown to anyone what the War in Heaven was all about and what happen in 1914, for it was not war only that took place, a great sickness and several earthquakes took place that steam for some years, this is not unknown to anyone.
Their Christology as always been the same if you understood the pastor of the Bible Students, Russell's, study and application of Jesus becoming a King that year. For if it had changed, the gospel would have ceased prior to what happen, for even the JWs know that a time will come when their preaching will cease - which was not he case.
I posted here before of all existing and non-existing faiths that shared that same view of Jesus becoming a King in that time and Satan's cast out resulting in the sickness, war and death that took place all in 1914 at a grand scale.
The truth stems from the very inspired Scriptures from the Bible. For it is used to teach, to profess, and to give/take insight (2 Timothy 3:16)
No, it cannot. After what went down mid-2015, the truth about God will prevail, nothing can stop it, for God's Word triumphs all who try to change and or stop it. As did our Church Fathers who defended the truth, as do us all who know what is the truth.
God the Father, the one and only El Shaddai. He is the God of our Lord, Christ Jesus, he is the God of me, and he is the God of you.
Praise Yah.
Because from the 4th century and onward, falsehood at entered into the teachings. So there is 2 factions, those with the truth and those who do not have the truth, and both faction consist of groups.
So those who claim they know and or have the truth, speaks the truth if they adhere to the teachings of the Church and apply it by means of ministering, preaching, what have you.
No because others who claim to have the truth do not have it. They abide by the accursed teachings that are not of the Church and will do anything and everything to justify it as truth when it is not i.e. religious authority is solely men and not women but they preach women can do the same when it is against God's Order, moreover, they will go above and beyond to say you are shaming women and or being ungodly because of defending God's order. We also have those who have the Bible to defend and justify homosexuality, altering Paul's Words or what happen in Sodom and Gomorrah.
Among all things, one of the things that is against the true is the Trinity.
The real truth can never change, if anything, those who study the truth make adjustment to Christ-life lifestyle and application of Scripture, especially in times when things are changing and new things from the Bible is learned.
Because one can tell what is truth and what is not truth. God allows those who can see and understand the truth, inasmuch, to apply said truth. And when a truth is known, nothing will stop God's people from what is true in this imperfect world.
Well you have the book right there, it shouldn't be hard to see what it is conveying. But you are one to not read into things as with all discussions.
That is because in Restorationism, when they learn new things, mainly when it comes to application and or a shift in lifestyle, they apply it. For example, it is no surprise that Bible Students use to celebrate Christmas, as did those before them, but when they later learn the origins of the holiday, they ceased it, although they didn't take an extreme approach as their counterparts, but the application has been made, therefore, it can be noted, even by fact, that Jehovah's Witnesses are indeed Restorationist Christians, which is also fact according to their practices in a book I cited before.
As to what facts are you pointing to? So far I do not see any deception, as of recently that becomes true back in October whereas one can see who is on the right side regarding God.
God Word is inspired. As for the chosen ones of which you call anointed, they are not inspired or claim to be, never have they made such a claim. Even in the Bible we also see this, for example, the Mother of Samuel was mistaken to be a crazed drunk by a man of God, High Priest Eli, when in reality she was praying,
Every year, Elkanah would offer a sacrifice at the Shiloh sanctuary, and give Penninah and her children a portion but he gave Hannah a double portion "because he loved her, and the LORD [YHWH] had closed her womb" (1 Samuel 1:5). One day Hannah went up to the temple, and prayed with great weeping (I Samuel 1:10), while Eli the High Priest was sitting on a chair near the doorpost.
In her prayer, she asked God for a son and in return she vowed to give the son back to God for the service of God. She promised he would remain a Nazarite all the days of his life. According to Lillian Klein, the value of women is demonstrably enhanced by their child-bearing capacities. The narrative takes her pain and places it in her personal failure and then draws it out in a communal context. The desperation of Hannah’s vow indicates that merely bearing a male child would establish her in the community.
Eli thought she was drunk and questioned her. When she explained herself, he blessed her and sent her home. Hannah conceived and bore a son, and named him Samuel, literally Heard by God, "since she had asked the Lord for him" (1 Samuel 1:20 ). The role of women giving names in premonarchic Israel suggests an authoritative social role, at least within the family. She raised him until he was weaned and brought him to the temple along with a sacrifice.
And we have other examples too, in the Bible, so it is not a surprise today when anyone who is said to be chosen by God is not inspired, but they speak of God's Word, which is inspired. Let that sink in.
And what does this have to do with people accepting Bible Truth?
I recall I told you when I visited Thailand, I spoke to some there who didn't even know what a Bible was, and they later learned not what a bible is, but God's Word. Elsewhere I seen women who strive to serve God 100% and even in Africa as well.
Perhaps if you did what Jesus did when he actually preached, according to the four gospel accounts, and that his own followers preached, as with the the Christians of Pentecost who went out like an army to preach the gospel, you'd see that for yourself.
If the Lord asks you to spread the message, that is a command, if you ignore that command, well, when the Christ returns, you won't be recognized at all.

This man has observed Benjamin Button one too many times.

Yep! Your right. Scripture doesn’t say anything about Cannibalism. I'm sure glad everyone tells the truth here.
1.       2 Kings 6:24-33 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
              The Siege of Samaria—Cannibalism
             2 Kings 6:24-33 Lexham English Bible (LEB)
             Besieged Samaria Resorts to Cannibalism
2.       Ezekiel 5 New International Version (NIV)
              God’s Razor of Judgment
3.       Leviticus 26:27-30
4.       Lamentations 2:16-21
5.       Jeremiah 19:7-10
6.       Deuteronomy 28:52-57
Murder is wrong. can it be extrapolated to be part of cannibalism if you kill to eat, unless you snort bath salt Just like that guy in Florida, attacked another person to start eating him alive?
https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/face-eating-cannibal-attack-latest-bath-salts-incident/story?id=16470389
1.       Exodus 20:13
2.       Leviticus 24:17
3.       Matthew 5:21
Now, people can get technical by suggesting they are referring to dead flesh. But can it be that scripture also refers to dead flesh? Deuteronomy 28:57
So, what kind of cannibalism is not referenced in the canonized bible? I wonder if drinking human blood is considered cannibalism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-cannibalism
I wonder what jiminy cricket would say. But wait, none of this has to do with cannibalism, never mind. ?

I do not understand this question at all.
Anyway, on the subject of truth, If you want to get down to basics that is, 
John 8:26: "As a matter of fact, the One who sent me is true,"
John 8:31-32 “If you remain in my word, you are really my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
Romans 3:4 "But let God be found true, even if every man be found a liar"
So really what Jehovah tells us, through Christ, is true.  (2Tim3:16-17)
Other than that, (and there are many of these), our position is neatly summed up by Richard Feynman who I will quote again:  
" We never are definitely right, we can only be sure we are wrong."

As we can see here nothing in this small snippet says they claim to be inspired prophets, you merely upper-cased Prophet-like Organization, ironically enough you left in the last part just as he the days of the early Christian congregation, and to add on with the very fact that anyone who tries to follow the early church, the apostolic church considers that church as true, which is, quite damaging on your part with what the next part of that quote says, as it reads:
He designates these Christians as his “faithful and discreet slave.” (Matt. 24:45-47) This “slave” group is strictly commanded: “Do not treat prophesyings with contempt.” (1 Thess. 5:20) This has proved true of Jehovah’s anointed witnesses on earth. They pay attention to prophecy with the greatest respectfulness. They have corrected themselves when prophecy revealed their own shortcomings. They have not held back when prophecy has condemned practices followed even in Christendom. (Isa. 58:1) Yes, they have proclaimed the prophecies written in God’s Word even though this has brought world hatred toward them.—Matt. 24:9.
So if they were inspired prophets, you'd have to explain that last part which makes your own quote a self-refutation. you can fool someone easily, perhaps Srecko, with just a quote cut in half, and like I had done with you last time, you quote the whole thing instead of part of it.
Therefore, I ask you this time, direct to you and you alone only because you seem to be the guy who can pull information also, show me anywhere where this Restorationist Christian group has claimed to be inspired prophets? In fact, show me a historical fact that any Non-Trinitarian who is putting into application of the early church to be inspired prophets? When the history of Restorationism, perhaps the early church - no, The Didache can be used against you at this point, Witness?
This I'd like to see and maybe it would put your History of Christianity to the test this time around.
The quote states they act as prophets of God and can prove it. Any of us can act as prophets and prove it, but none of us can make the claim of inspiration, so where in this quote does it say they are inspired prophets? So far I only see they are and can act as prophets of God, but inspired prophets - remains to be seen, granted that even in the history of non-Trinitarianism, such ones who adhere to the church would never claim to be an inquired prophet, not even Church Father Eusebius of Caesarea would make that move granted his history and knowledgeable influence and understanding of inspired Scriptures.
Furthermore, what kills it for you even more is the fact that parts of where this quot originated from, the following statement says that them, who were called Bible Students had been active in preaching the gospel, as is what the prophets have done in their time, even those of Pentecost, for the gospel contains not just the good news gospel, but also, the Messianic Age, all coupled with the Great Commission, of which you are on the fence about as per last discussion. The sole focus in that paragraph also is Matthew 24:14.
How are you so sure? Anyone who follows or tries to be like the early church should be carefully examined.
Like the church they adhere to the inspired Scriptures and they understand what the holy spirit is, but nowhere, anywhere have we seen them make claim to be an inspired prophet.
demonic inspiration you say? How when you haven't proven them to even make claim to inspiration? If anything we can discern such ones and apply 1 John 4:1, i.e. with discernment anyone can tell what is true and what is false, what is in accordance with the Scriptures and what is not. You have already proven yourself to which side of the spectrum you are on, many, many times when it came to Scripture, even going out on a limb to twist Greek Words in the process.
Perhaps next time you should cross-examine yourself and study the history of Christendom.
What I would be interested in is the claim of them being inspired prophets. Show me, Witness. Because like last time when I asked you showered me with many many verses that evade what is being asked.

semper fi. That Lamb's on a mission, but I seriously down that type of firepower he's carrying he can travel properly.

Your ability to quote such scriptures would seem to indicate your ability to understand them in context and correctly. Otherwise, you would just be demonstrating an ignorance  of God's word.
I will quote a child's scripture for you that should resolve your dilemna as expressed. "Children be obedient to your parents in union with the Lord, for this is righteous" Eph 6:1.

So according to you if you speak of someone, make him known and give information of something that is to reveal and or profess support what does make it to you, Butler?
I posted an image a few response back, you were the one who posted about Mr. Gardener a few months ago the same Mr. Gardner who took part in disrupting the JW Church that Evo goes to.
Apparently so, but aside from that I strongly encourage you to take up what I said and adhere to Child Abuse Prevention sources, of which I posted to you before. For if I have to be honest, abuse and neglect of children is far greater in the UK, than it is to us here.
If your Father can teach you to do good, do the same to another who is lower than you, younger than you so he will be wise just as your Father has made you wise.
For if we do not take this stance, the next thing you know such ones will succumb to violence, they will succumb to other vile things and will become a potential victim to an abuser. Play your part the best way you can or only remain to be the very obstacle that is preventing those who do take such things seriously.
Srecko Sostar continued to dodge the very fact that I had used primarily Child Abuse and Neglect Services own information against him, as with Bible Principles - that he himself asked for, so I encourage do what he cannot do, read and understand what is being conveyed about better solutions.
After all that information that I linked is the real deal, I am just a centimeter away from posting actual PSAs that would pretty much defeat the deception Srecko poses in regards to child abuse prevention and his sly misinterpretation of my words.
If the Bible says we are to teach ourselves to be wisdom we do it, in turn we teach our children to be wise, just as both Mary and Joseph taught Jesus the very Law and practices of the Jews he was born under.

So according to you if you speak of someone, make him known and give information of something that is to reveal and or profess support what does make it to you, Butler?
I posted an image a few response back, you were the one who posted about Mr. Gardener a few months ago the same Mr. Gardner who took part in disrupting the JW Church that Evo goes to.
Apparently so, but aside from that I strongly encourage you to take up what I said and adhere to Child Abuse Prevention sources, of which I posted to you before. For if I have to be honest, abuse and neglect of children is far greater in the UK, than it is to us here.
If your Father can teach you to do good, do the same to another who is lower than you, younger than you so he will be wise just as your Father has made you wise.
For if we do not take this stance, the next thing you know such ones will succumb to violence, they will succumb to other vile things and will become a potential victim to an abuser. Play your part the best way you can or only remain to be the very obstacle that is preventing those who do take such things seriously.
Srecko Sostar continued to dodge the very fact that I had used primarily Child Abuse and Neglect Services own information against him, as with Bible Principles - that he himself asked for, so I encourage do what he cannot do, read and understand what is being conveyed about better solutions.
After all that information that I linked is the real deal, I am just a centimeter away from posting actual PSAs that would pretty much defeat the deception Srecko poses in regards to child abuse prevention and his sly misinterpretation of my words.
If the Bible says we are to teach ourselves to be wisdom we do it, in turn we teach our children to be wise, just as both Mary and Joseph taught Jesus the very Law and practices of the Jews he was born under.

At what moment "The Truth" has ceased to be "The Truth"?
 
Perhaps when recruitment of new and more donors becomes more important than Justice and Mercy, and personal integrity
Resistance may be futile ... but not EVERY person of integrity and honest heart wants to be fully assimilated, and become a BORG

Nowhere does in the bible does it state Jesus is God because the verse tells you of what he met by the Temple, which is the Temple of his Body. For if Jesus was indeed God, it would discredited the very fact that in other verses it is made known that God also dwells in True Christians as he dwells in Jesus, the fullness of deity that dwells in him and them, according to the verses.
The additional verses listed above, several of them, if not most, cross-references with each other regarding that passage, not only does it show that it I.D.s both the Father and Son, it shows you clearly that God had a role in Jesus' resurrection, for the Bible speaks of God as being the life-giver, and in giving life he does to the Son, and giving the authority and power to the Son so that he too can resurrect a great multitude of people and I agree with what was said to Jesus in the same gospel, that whatever he asks from God, God will give to him.
That is understandable, but the Bible does not show anywhere that the Son is El Shaddai, the Son was sent [Shaliach] by El Shaddai. It is wiser to take in what the Bible says and what the followers of the Christ taught, in turn, taught to the people, the church.
That being said, in Trinity doctrine, the Father is not Jesus and Jesus is not the Father. For one to say Jesus raised himself is also to say the Father did not raise Jesus because Jesus is not the Father, or perhaps to say the Father raised Jesus is also to say that Jesus did not raise himself.

To profess that Jesus raised himself from the dead is also to say it was not the Triune God who raised Jesus since Jesus is not the Triune being and the Triune being is not Jesus, for what it lands in another factor of confusion when a claim is made that Jesus raised himself and then insist that two other persons raised that same "himself". 

Which makes the problem an even bigger fire is that it puts one in a position to believe in 4 that different identities raised this particular himself:
 
(1) the Father (2) the Son (3) the Holy Spirit (4) the Triune God Resulting in such ones who believe somehow Jesus is El Shaddai, YHWH, they are put in a situation that renders them unable to see or acknowledge their own contradictory confusion.
Another factor is that YHWH himself, is incorruptible, not like a man or a son of man, and only YHWH, all of which the Bible makes it clear of several times, furthermore, is identified as the Father, as well as God, and by the Law, this is stated as well, something of which I believe I stated before.
Anytime, for the Bible and the context that comes from Scripture is always key- nothing cannot be left out and everything must be taken to understand the apostolic church's position - which lines up with that age.
I never dismiss Scriptures, if I had, it would defeat the utmost respect and practice of Biblical Hermeneutics in my case, after all, I respect the verse and passage by making use of the cross-references and as with anyone who practices Biblical Hermeneutics, all things must be taken into account and anything pertaining to how the passage connects harmonious with anything pertaining to an event read in the Bible, that includes all verses that line up with that time-frame of Christ Jesus and the meaning of what he said, furthermore, there is no contradiction, granted that among the source gospel accounts, John's gospel was the unique one, if I may add. The specific account in John 2 (the passage in question being 13-22).
Now, the claim here regarding John 2:19 to some means Jesus raised himself. For after reading this without further study and or ignoring the cross-references that brings forth the context, one would read into it as is and look no further after that. This brings the reason of such ones who don't see the problem with their claim; [God the Father raised Jesus from the dead], [the Holy Spirit raised Jesus from the dead], and [Jesus raised himself from the dead]. 

When context is taken seriously and the references, it is clear of who raised Jesus from the Dead to fulfill what was said, as well as what was in use by means of it, and as we can see when Jesus actually died, he was actually dead for that time when he was later resurrected.

To believe that all 3 persons of Trinity doctrine raised Jesus from the dead, therefore, it is concluded to such ones that the Triune God raised Jesus from the dead and here is where the confusion manifests in of itself.

Outside of the realm of confusion, as the Bible itself professes when context is put forth in application.

Unfortunately, people who take this claim seriously without application of context don't always understand that they aren't making any sense at times. In the doctrine of the Trinity, the Father is not the Triune being, the Son is not the Triune being, and the Holy Spirit is not the Triune being, and conversely, the Triune being is not the Father, the Triune being is not the Son, and the Triune being is not the Holy Spirit; to say Jesus raised himself is therefore to say the Triune being did not raise Jesus because Jesus is not the Triune being in Trinity doctrine or to say the Triune being raised Jesus is to say that Jesus did not raise himself since the Triune being is not the Jesus, for the Father raised Jesus from the dead in addition with Jesus raised Jesus from the dead and the Holy Spirit raised Jesus from the dead - that amounts to the Triune God raising Jesus from the dead, granted that Jesus himself actually did perish, in this case actually died, or as the Bible says - expired.
What some fail to see is that if they make such a claim, they can't say the Father raised Jesus from the dead nor can they say Jesus raised Jesus from the dead nor can they say the Holy Spirit raised Jesus from the dead because any one of these 3 is not the Triune God in their own doctrine of the Trinity.
Simply put, to claim the Triune God raised Jesus contradicts the claim that Jesus raised himself. In the Doctrine of the Trinity, you simply cannot say that the Triune God raised Jesus from the dead and also insist Jesus raised himself from the dead, and hope to make any kind of sense whatsoever because Jesus is not the Triune God, and the Triune God is not Jesus. The Triune God raised Jesus from the dead or Jesus raised himself from the dead. Therefore, in the doctrine of the Trinity, you can't claim both without contradicting yourself in the process.
And yet when God speaks, he wants us to understand His Word, and but forth the application, and his own Son speaks God's Word, hence Shalich Principle in play on Jesus' part.

All things should be taken into consideration.
John 2:19 does not amount to any evidence that Jesus is God at all (especially if you take in the meaning of his words along with the references), he speaks of the Temple of His Body, and the very fact Jesus, while on earth was corruptible, capable of dying and has died, thus showing you that he was like us of mankind, who was indeed born a Jew into the Law (Galatians 4:4).
The next factor is the fact that Jesus profess Shema, God cannot profess Shema because he is the one who gave this Law to Moses in which he and the people followed well into Paul and Jesus' day and into present day - us. And the other regarding Jesus being a mediator between 2 parties [God and the disciples he spoke regarding the Covenant with in regards to Spiritual Israel].

In the Bible we only see the Father identified as God, many times, and we see people who know, even demons and the fallen one himself, that Jesus is God's Son, and Jesus himself is well aware of the one who sent him and the Will of whom he is doing as well as the one who raised him from the Dead, thus making him the Firstborn out of the Dead and the First of the Firstfruits.
 
There is only one God, not three.
Well I suggest you make more research regarding the Bible and not wait around for Judgement. Just as when Jesus was a child who observe, recite and read the Old Testament, learned of who the God of Israel is and what he had done, for us today we must do the same, and read the word daily and take everything into consideration as with the cross-references and context that comes from the Bible.
for John 1:3, it is also best to carefully consider John 1:5, the Light shines in the darkness, it is obviously apparent that these words are referring to the ministry of Jesus  as seen in John 3:19-21, 8:12, 9:5 and 12:35-36, granted the very first chapter of John is John's Introductory. Moving into verse 4, we also read that life was in the Word and that life was the Light of men. It should be taken into consideration here that John is not referring to the Genesis act of creation at this point. The true Light which enlightens every man was presently coming into the world (John 1:9). The last part of verse 3, in connection with verse 4 indicates that life and light came into existence by means of the Word. (Colossians 1:15, 16).

With this information in view, it is obviously apparent that John 1:3 is not referring to the Genesis act of creation but to all the things that came to be through the proclamation of the Word, through the ministry of Jesus. For this reason, Jesus cried, It is finished (it has been accomplished) later down the road when he was killed by means of Crucifixion; just as we find God was finished all His works in the Genesis act of creation, the same regarding the one sent by means of Shaliach Principle. Jesus' ministry was the beginning of the new creation of God, whereas our risen Lord, Christ Jesus, is the first of the firstfruits of that new creation (as well as the one Firstborn out of death), the beginning of the creation of God, mainly when it can be understood what the new earth and new heavens entails regarding said new creation.
Indeed, but the Temple in question is His Body, the Body of our Lord, Christ Jesus, in turn the Father's Temple due to the very fact God does his Purpose and Will through his Son. That temple of which they were thinking about was The Temple of Herod.
Yes, the Holy Spirit is mention in both verses, but you have one instance regarding the Christ regarding him being risen on the 3rd day and the other regarding those who are ministers. Because the Holy Spirit is mention in both instances, does not equate the two into being the same event, despite Holy Spirit being one of 90 or so occurrences in various instances in the Greek New Testament.
If so why state Jesus raised himself when the Bible itself has made it clear he had expired?
You sure? Can you show me Acts 13:2 references regarding John 2:19? Regarding my response to you is as followed: [Acts 13:2 focuses on such ones ministering for God. The references for this verse points to Ac 9:15 and 1 Timothy 2:7, even while outlined nothing points back in references to Jesus being risen from the tomb....], I do not see Acts 13:2 pointing back to John 2:19 - anywhere, even while outlined.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/esv/jhn/2/1/t_corr_999019 https://www.openbible.info/labs/cross-references/search?q=John+2%3A19 https://biblehub.com/john/2-19.htm The only verses Acts 13:2 cross-references to and points back to even in outline form is
Deuteronomy 10:8, 1 Samuel 2:11, Daniel 9:3, Matthew 9:38, Luke 2:37, 1 Timothy 2:7 (as mentioned), 2 Timothy 1:11, Acts 8:29, 9:15 (as mentioned), 22:21, 14:26, Romans 1:1, 1 Corinthians 12:11, Galatians 1:15, 2:8-9, Ephesians 3:7, Hebrews 5:4, etc and dozens more, including the ones above amounting to a total of 41 verses (with 1 Chronicles 16:37-43 bringing the count up by 47 verses).

That being said, even regarding Acts 13:2, both John 2:19 and Romans 18:11, is nowhere to be found, even in cross-references without outline in the Bible itself does not say and it only points back to the 2 verses already mentioned, granted that both instances were and are entirely different, despite the Spirit of God being mentioned in both instances.
And the bible informs us the Christ had expired and God had a hand in his resurrection.

@BillyTheKid46 Well there is more, including the ones all 3 of us had mentioned.
That being,
God raised him up again, having loosed the pangs of death, since it was not possible for him to be held by it. (Acts 2:24). This Jesus God raised up again. (Acts 2:32).  You put to death the Prince of life, the one whom God raised from the dead, a fact to which we are witnesses. (Acts 3:15).  Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead (Acts 4:10).  The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree. (Acts 5:30).  God raised him up on the third day (Acts 10:40).  God raised Him from the dead... God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, "You are My son; Today I have begotten You." He raised him up from the dead, no longer to return to corruption... He whom God raised did not undergo corruption (Acts 13:30-37).  His Son, who came to be out the seed of David according to the flesh, fixed son of God in power by the resurrection out of the dead, according to the Spirit of Holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 1:3-4)  Those who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. (Romans 4:24).  Therefore we have been buried with him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:4) But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit which dwells in you. (Romans 8:11). God raised him from the dead. (Romans 10:9).  Now God has not only raised the Lord, but will also raise us up through His power. (1 Corinthians 6:14).  Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. (1 Corinthians 15:15).  We also believe, therefore we also speak knowing that He who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus. (2 Corinthians 4:13-14).  The God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory.... He raised him from the dead and seated him at His right hand in the heavenlies (Ephesians 1:17-20).  You turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead. (1 Thessalonians 1:10)  ...through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. (1 Peter 1:21) God the Father, who raised him from the dead. (Galatians 1:1).

The only factor that plays against you is the fact Jesus was/is able to do nothing himself expect the Father who is able to do these things.
In the Gospel of John, Jesus insisted that he was not able to do anything from himself. As he himself testified, it was the Father abiding in him who did the works (John 14:10; cf. Matt 12:28; Acts 2:22). Now, to you, if this was true of Jesus while he was alive and well, how much more was he unable to do anything of himself when he was laying dead in a tomb.
John 5:30 - I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me. The other factor against you in this regard what is said in other verses in Acts and elsewhere, I can think of 16 verses, coupled with references and context, right now.
Not to mention they misinterpret what he said, as is done before.
So how, according to you does that relate back to Acts 2:24 when Acts 13:2 is not a cross-references to the core passage in of itself?
We also should not be leaving out the fact the verse professed before states that He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit which dwells in you. So yes.
As for Acts 13:2 it reads: While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”
The Holy Spirit is spoken of many, many times in the Greek Text as it is mentioned here as well, and the focus here is the Christ who has died and has risen, Acts 13:2 focuses on such ones ministering for God. The references for this verse points to Ac 9:15 and 1 Timothy 2:7, even while outlined nothing points back in references to Jesus being risen from the tomb.

It was professed that it was God who raised Jesus from the Dead, as well as God making him both the Lord and Christ.
The verse conveys that the Father raised Jesus from the dead. Jesus was the Father's Word and the Father spoke decisively when He raised Jesus from the dead.
When Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up and we can see the reaction and action from the Jews taken after this was said.
The facts show us that his body was the Temple of God; the Word tabernacled in human flesh and that flesh was the Father's Temple. He, this body of flesh, was the Father's Word and he spoke the words of the Father, as we are well aware of regarding the Old and New Testament and by means of whom Jesus came from. And clearly this did not sit well with the Jews and they plot to kill him.
Matthew 26:59-61, 27:39, 40 and  Mark 14:57, 58 are also references.
You technically answered yourself with this one granted that Romans 8:11 points back to Acts 2:24 and in addition to the other references being Ephesians 2:1, 5. For indeed, God was the one responsible for taking the Lord out of the pangs of Death.

@BillyTheKid46 That too, for YHWH also means to exist. For all bene elohims come into existence because of elohim himself - God our Father, who has created them.

One cannot clean out a problem that is spread out throughout the world like a plague. You can prevent small instances - yes, but as to he problem itself - no. There are also better ways of doing things, better solutions, but people do not want to take advantage of such, one of these solutions is to educate our children on this matter, for if we can teach a child about Strangers, we can do the same for Child Abuse, for this is recommended by Child Abuse and Neglect Services to teach young ones about this, to see the signs.
If the Bible has taught us anything, God does not focus on one man, he focuses on all men, sees their hearts, etc. It is not unknown to anyone that child abuse is within Jehovah's Witnesses, but it is silly to single them out when the problem is all over the place, even in restaurants as of recently.
That being said, problems like this will not cease one's faith at all, if that were the cases, a what if perhaps, kids would not be allowed to go to schools, churches, mosques, synagogues, etc. Restaurants would be off limits to ensure child safety therefore it would task a grown adult to go and buy the food and bring it back. And like I said before, even to all denominations regarding Unitarians, even us Biblical Unitarians, child abuse is an issue, it didn't stop me from professing truth and it allowed some of us to wise up and teach our children so they can teach others to see the signs.
How are you so sure if you yourself do not judge assume or met them, as you claim? This goes back to your comment of who has God's approval. For he is still a JW, you are not, granted he is one still perhaps he knows way more in regards to what he professes.
As with all errors, they must be brought to attention.
He didn't mention Jesus, he mentioned Peter, do not add to someone's word, even of God's, there is a verse for that.
Thinking stated the following: A lot of us don’t follow the GB...we follow,the scriptures and test it out as the beroeans did....you assume we are all puppets...you give no respect to many brothers and sisters who have stronger faith than yourself.....John you have a big mouth.....I can say that because once I did to....Peter had a big mouth too....but he learnt humility...and eventually I learnt it to....and not from any GB...but from reading the scriptures and allowing them to discipline me and correct me....
Now, Thinking on made that response because of your response towards him, which is to a degree true because whenever it comes with someone who actually has something informative to say it does not sit well with you. The young one who spoke of forgiveness, you who claim you do not assume just assume an ordeal he had last year he was not a person who forgives, you also go on to say he equals ExJWs to gangsters when he was referring to gangsters in the Tri-State area, as per my example of something that was actually a true story.
Sometimes you have to see that all JWs are not the same ones you encountered in your original church.
And yet previously you say spoke of trick questions, so the question Evo asked proved the point. Those who commit pedophilia do not make up the masses, nor, as per Evo's question, does not make them pedophile lovers.
In all institutions,it never began with JWs or solely engulfs them alone. As far as I am concern the grooming gangs do not make up all of you in the UK, just that small pocket of persons who has an intent to do bad to young British girls. The same way for me and others in the US who are of color or an ethnic background, the actions of a black man does not define all of us. In the JWs case, they are 8.5 million and growing, should one commit these acts, it does not define all the other 8.5 million among them.
You need to open your eyes because you cannot single out a sole group when the problem is all over and in all forms of society even the government i.e. Theresa May who had her hands tied before regarding children, but not of sex abuse.
Yes they do know, but at the same time, there are people going about, even combating the problem in the best way, not going on a warpath to cease a faith from existence.
There has been a few in the UK, some of these protesters also stem into the Robinson party, anti-Islam and a list of other things. A problem with some of these protests is they are also quick to spread conspiracy as well, and I did post some facts about this before, and I thank Jack Ryan who is supposedly an Atheist, for it.
God is aware that all types of wickedness is in the world, and clearly Christians know that God himself will be the one to make things right. The same issue you have regarding child abuse as with all people who dealt with it in a similar fashion and t pain it brings, this will be mended on God's Day.
If it is a test you speak of, we have to be vigilant and enduring always even in the face of problems.
The only reason people join them, and are still growing, is the of the teachings intertwined with their community. Yes some of them will have conflict and or some thing going on with others in their faith community - as with all of us, but it will not stop one from following their faith no matter how you try to knock it.
If you truly believe in God, you would not be oblivious of what he will do to wicked people. A time will indeed come, but as for us, we have to be smart about all things, even in regards of child abuse.