Shiwiii

4 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

It's a bit much to suggest that God offs people over the details of modern doctrine. My God does not do so, assuming one does not attempt to grab the wheel from the driver.

And please don't say he does, or if you do say it, say it on the proper thread. It is territory well-covered lately.

I think you may have read into what Alessandro posted. I don't see where Alessandro said God would off them because of modern doctrines. What I saw and agree with is the responsibility of a Christian to warn/discuss issues with those around them who may have been mislead. If those folks are so narrow minded to not listen and see things from a different perspective, mind you no one said accept the opposing position, then we have done what we are supposed to do. For someone to adopt an opposing position, one must first accept discussion. 

19 hours ago, Alessandro Corona said:

No, as a Christian I have an obligation to warn everyone when they are being misled. Even if it means losing my friends, their blood isn't on my hands,  I warned them all as much as I could. 

Paul said the same regarding a group of people he was preaching to. 

I completely agree

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Leave him alone!!! He may be an apostate, but he's a NICE apostate - um - I guess. What has he been saying lately?

TTH, did you not read the latest on how to treat apostate ones? LOL 

You might want to take a refresher course, there is no NICE apostates.........Just ask Ray Franz......oh wait, you can't. You can see how he was treated though. He was a very nice man

56 minutes ago, Gone Fishing said:

Strange stance in the light of James 4:1.  The answer is in James' letter actually.

James 4:1 is speaking about the conflicts which arose around the time James wrote, between the Jews, which were about which of the 12 tribes had more power and ability to take the issues to court. See James 2:5-6. This was showing favoritism and oppressing the poor by taking them to courts and establishing a false power by means of wealth.  All of the book of James is directed towards the Jews who were Christian about the practical aspects of the Christian faith. This has nothing to do with fighting among the members of the church per se, but more so about the inward fighting among each individual about carnal desires. It is our own desires that conflict within us to envy, lust, hatred, etc. 

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

No offense, Shiwiii - forgive me if I misunderstand you - but it seems you are being obtuse. I said more than once that they have 1000 years to work up to a position they do not occupy now, even if we assume their warfare is physical.

Go off to war then if you think it is such a great idea. No one here is saying you can't.

Now I think you are being silly and trying to confuse not only me but all those around here. I was addressing this stance:

"Who are no part of the world and learn war no more? Again, the historical record of the 20th century testifies: only Jehovah's Witnesses." Watchtower 1992 Apr 1 p.12

On 8/31/2017 at 2:33 PM, Alessandro Corona said:

yes you would. I am basically an apostate to them because I don't believe it. 

So why didn't you just get on board and swallow it down while nodding your head? I mean I've heard that the gb mostly right, so shouldn't that be enough to turn your head and look the other way when you know they are teaching wrongs? 

5 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

As I say, they have 1000 years to work up to a new position. Moreover, how much is physical warfare on their end is unclear. Surely this forum has proven a genuine battleground, yet not a punch has been thrown.

It's 1000 years off. If things 100 years in the past do not interest me overmuch, neither do they 1000 years in the future. Maybe even JTR's points will factor in somehow. Dunno. I'll worry about it when I get there, assuming I do.

It kind of blows a huge hole in the wt's stance that jw's do not go to war. That was my point. This just proves that the whole not going to war thing is made up by men, and it is those men who impose these additional teachings upon their followers. Hence the relation to the topic and conversation by Otto, Witness and I.

4 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

The bad ones will have 1000 years to work up a head of steam. You don't think that's enough time?

its not that, it is more about the fact that jw's do NOT go to war and kill. How will they then if that is the stance now? 

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

In other words, it will be JWs against jws.

This was the answer I was figuring. 

So how can this be if they do not go to war?

7 hours ago, Otto said:

THIS QUOTE OF ISA 2v3 SHOWS 2 THINGS IN ITS USE, THE VERSE IS SAYING THAT LAW GOES FORTH AND TEACHINGS OF TRUTH ABOUT THE WAYS OF GOD SO THOSE WHO ARE TRUE SERVANTS CAN WALK IN HIS (JEHOVAHS) WAYS...

Agreed

7 hours ago, Otto said:

THAT MEANS THAT CHRISTMAS, EASTER, BIRTHDAYS, TRINITY, HELLFIRE, END OF THE WORLD, RAPTURE, CROSS, UNIVERSAL SALVATION etc etc etc ARE ALL BARRIERS TO "HIS WAYS" AND "ACCURATE KNOWLEDGE" OF GOD AND HIS SON...CAN YOU NOT SEE THAT?

Utter rubbish, I see no mention of abstaining from Christmas, Easter, Birthdays Etc. in any of the scriptures you mentioned.....nor any other scriptures. It is only in the wt publications is that mentioned. This is in direct opposition to Colossians 2:16 as I stated above. 

7 hours ago, Otto said:

ISA IS REFERING TO KNOWING TRUTH NOT FALSEHOOD, AND PRACTICING TRUTH.

true

7 hours ago, Otto said:

ALL OF CHRISTENDOM PRACTICE THE FALSEHOOD AND THE WITNESSES PRACTICE THE TRUTH IN THAT THEY REJECT THOSE IDEAS ABOVE.

Unsubstantiated claim to align yourself with what you think is the "truth", since none of that can be found in scripture.

7 hours ago, Otto said:

NOT KNOWING THE EXACT IDENTITY OF GOG OF MAGOG (AND THE JWs MAY BE CORRECT ON THIS ANYWAY) IS NOT REQUIRED TO WALK IN HIS LAWS, AS GOG IS NOT A LAW THAT AIDS SALVATION.

You are correct here, it is only by faith that we have salvation (1 Thes 5:9, 2 Tim 3:15). Not any org, not a group of men, nothing but Faith. 

5 hours ago, Otto said:

     NOW ITS EASY TO SAY THIS FROM A MAGAZINE NEARLY 100 YEARS OLD, BUT A FEW YEARS LATER THE JWs REJECTED THE PAGAN CROSS AND THE PAGAN CHRISTMAS......SO OBVIOUSLY THINGS CHANGE, 1914 IS STILL THERE BUT 1925, THE CROSS, CHRISSTMAS  STC ARE ALL GONE BECAUSE OF INCREASE INFORMATION ON THE SUBJECTS IN QUESTION, WOULD YOU PREFER AN ORGANISATION THAT FINDS OUT SOMETHING IS WRONG...LIKE EASTER...BUT PRACTICES IT ANYWAY???  WHAT LOGIC IS THAT, WHERE IS THE LOVE OF TRUTH IN THAT IDEA??

What scriptures support this statement? I mean, what scripture was not available when the cross, Christmas and 1925 were all practiced by jw's? Can you provide these scriptures that changed the views of the gb? By the way, I'd prefer NO organization,

5 hours ago, Otto said:

THE WTBATS HAVE NEVER CLAIMED TO BE "INSPIRED"...SHOW ME WHERE THEY SAY THEY ARE. THE USE OF THESE FEW VERSES THAT YOU ATTEMPT TO SHOW APPLIES TO THE JWs IS SILLY AS IT APPLIES TO ALL OF CHRISTENDOM ALSO, NO I SET OF VERSES CAN BE QUOTED TO SHOWTHAT ANY GROUP OF PEOPLE ARE REFERENCED...UNLESS THE VERSE EXPLICITLY SPEAKS OF SOMETHING THAT SAID GROUP PRACITE...THES REST IS PIECED TOGETHER THROUGH REASONING ON MANY BVERSES OF INFORMATION WHICH ARRIVES AT A CONCLUSION BY REASON ALONE....YOU COMMENT IS THEREFORE WRONG AND IRRELEVANT

. You can't be serious.....here are just a few:

1967 "We cannot claim to love God, yet deny his word and channel of communication." (Watchtower, October 1, 1967, p. 591)

1973 "Consider too, the fact that Jehovah's organization alone in all the earth is directed by God's holy spirit or active force." (Watchtower, July 1, 1973, page 402)

1976 "We must take seriously what his Word says and what his organization reveals to us.... Would not a failure to respond to direction from God through his organization really indicate a rejection of divine rulership?" (Watchtower, February 15, 1976, p. 214)

1984 "Faith in Jehovah, faith in those whom he is using as spokesmen, yes, faith in his organization! As we 'go out' to Jehovah's service today, how important it is that we exercise such faith!" (Watchtower July 1, 1984 p17)

1981 "Prophecies open up to us as Jehovah's holy spirit sheds light upon them, and as they are fulfilled in world events or in the experiences of God's people." (Watchtower, December 1, 1981 p. 17)

5 hours ago, Otto said:

“This generation” teaching.  POISON  Matt 16:4; Ps 14:5 NONSENSE, THE CURRENT UNDERSTANDING IS SOLID AND ONLY TIME WILL TELL ITS ACCURACY

Really???? Explain it to us then using scriptrue

5 hours ago, Otto said:

THE 1ST CENTRUY CHRISTIANS WERE UNITED, PAUL HAD TO GAIN AGREEMENT WITH THE ELDERS AND OTHER APOSTLES, SO NONE OF THE CHRISTIANS WERE ACTING ALONE....YOUR IDEAS ARE VERY WRONG AND DANGEROUS TO THOSE NOT WITH KNOWLEDGE.

Paul did not need to gain approval from anyone but God, which he already had by means of his faith. In fact, I believe it was Paul who called those at the council in Jerusalem  "false brethren" Gal 2:6. Why did he call them this? Because they were imposing additional teachings upon Christians! I think, but I might be wrong,  those additional teachings might have been no blood...or no birthdays...or there is no hell....following a group of men....etc. Doesn't really matter the fullness of the additional teachings, what matters is that adding the "law" (whatever "law") is wrong and against God's ways...

by the way, the part about birthdays and blood and hell was only for reference, it was about additional "laws" kinda like the :laws" the gb/wt puts upon its members. 

I also noticed how quickly you ignored my reply above about reading the Bible alone. 

48 minutes ago, Otto said:

How can anyone truly know the identity before hand....we can guess...but that's all...no religion has the absolute truth on the identity until after the event...then you will know who was right or not...however salvation is not gained by knowing the identity...and being wrong is not poison...observing Christmas...birthdays..and other pagan religious based false ideas is poison..because you know they 're wrong and still do them...i bet you swallow that poison down all the time..but an educated guess with the data you have on the identity of gog is not life saving.

Now your trinity...thats poison.

Hellfire thats poison.Christmas...poison

Jesus is God...thats poison

 

Earth to be destroyed...thats poison.

 

They are things that detract from the worship of God .....in truth....Gog does not.

 

What's the point in Christendom knowing Gogs identity...when they dont know Gods.

Watchtower Aug 15, 1981 - 

"They say it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone of in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such 'Bible reading,' they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentaries by Christendom's clergy were teaching 100 years ago, and some have even returned to celebrating Christendom's festivals again, such as the Roman Saturnalia of December 25th!"

So, by reading the Bible alone, a person will come to the conclusion of what? What was Christendom teaching 100 years ago? The trinity? yep. So you mean to tell me that a person cannot read/study the Bible alone or they will believe the trinity? 

Think about that for a moment......

So the wt says you need their publications in order to understand what God has written for us, because obviously God needs help in directing His people? How did God lose His ability to direct people? I mean He did it with Abraham and Moses, and also to people like Isaiah, Matthew, John and Paul. Was God slipping in His abilities in the 18th century? 

As far as your comment on holidays, I think the above wt quote also addresses this. If you read the Bible alone, without wt pubs or anything else, you will celebrate holidays. I wrote holidays on purpose because the insertion of Roman Saturnalia is a false claim. I know of no one who does such. December 25th is NOT Jesus birthday, and probably not the right time of year either, but the importance of recognizing the birth of our Lord can be done on any day (think the jw present day). Not only that but what does Colossians 2:16 say?

"16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day"

I think hate is the wrong word. I think oppose is more accurate. By opposition and dialog it is almost the same thing as the jw cart. Trying to reach out and help the other see a different side of the coin then they are use to. Of course there are some who become overbearing in their quest to reach out, and thus come off as haters, but I think their intention is the same. They just let their ego get in the way of reaching out. We ALL do that at times.  

12 hours ago, Otto said:

The meaning of Gog of magog is irrelevant it doesn't matter if it changes

Then why is it in the Bible? How is it not relevant? It does matter if the society changes their story over and over, it means they have no clue. Then for them to come back around to what the rest of Christianity believed Gog and Magog is, and have for quite some time, means they are just poking around in the dark. 

12 hours ago, Otto said:

and therefore with no other alternative you man up stop complaining and focus on the positive things that the Watchtower Society has done instead of the constant negative things

If there is just a little poison in the water will you drink it? 

Very nice post TTH.

It really is sad when this becomes a media plug and headline story either for or against someone instead of an encouragement for people to act this way everyday.  I'm sure Mattress Mack would be happy with a simple thank you instead of a parade in his honor. We should all encourage each other to act accordingly, as decent human beings, do what is right and not what is easy. 

On 8/29/2017 at 6:49 AM, Witness said:

 

“We are told that AT THE END OF THE 1,000 YEARS, Satan will be released from the abyss, and “he will go out to mislead those nations in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together for the war.” (Rev. 20:8) ws15 5/15 pp. 27-28

Ezek 38 and Rev 20, have seldom been referred together in Wt. magazines to describe this attack.  Why?  The Wt. teaches that the thousand year reign of Christ is initiated after Armageddon. 

I have a question that might spur a separate thread. 

If the 1000 year reign is AFTER Armageddon, and then this battle takes place at the end of the 1000 years, who exactly is fighting who according to jw's? I mean, doesn't the society state that ONLY jw's will be saved after Armageddon? So if all that there is left is jw's, then who do they go to war against? 

Another thought, if jw's do not engage in war, then again....who is fighting here? Either it will be jw's against jw's or someone has the story wrong. 

9 hours ago, John Houston said:

And those who took it as gospel, sold their homes, stop,living almost thinking the end was that near.

Didn't the wt say that it was a "fine" decision to such a thing? They even printed it in their mag on how it was great for those to do so in these last times. Talk about encouraging someones downfall. 

9 hours ago, John Houston said:

Since Jesus said no one knows the day or the hour, why need to know dates?

So why did the wt need to pick dates? 

On 6/12/2017 at 5:38 PM, bruceq said:

But some apostates would rather follow men or themselves who are governed by fleshly veiwpoints.

are you calling those who followed the wt legal team by not reporting the abuse, apostates? I agree. 

Also, on a side note........why you up vote your own posts? 

On 5/21/2017 at 8:25 PM, John Houston said:

Micah, I have never based my faith on math or dates. 3 things occurred that are proved scripturally and historically;[1]-Jerusalem was destroyed [2] the land was exiled for some 70 years, and [3] the Word went out to return to the homeland and the temple was rebuilt. Are these not facts? 607; 587 are not why I believe in the scriptures. Try something else.

I too believe the scriptures.........however, I do not believe in the gb and their assumptions of 1914/1918/1925/1975 based on their "math" from 607 or pyramid counting. It isn't so much about math, but rather what the leaders of the wt attribute their math with and demand the rnf to adhere to or face not being in harmony with the group and possible punishment. 

Correct me if I am wrong, but I do believe that is the basis of what Micah was getting at.  

I think you are correct. 

The value of the blood of the sacrifice is just that, a sacrifice, a loss, a death, etc. and without that then what sacrifice is there? 

Like you, I believe that Jesus cut himself in His experience as a carpenter but that was not the sacrifice. While I'm sure that His blood at those times did have value over ours when we cut ourselves, it still was not the ultimate sacrifice. 

With this being said, what value is there in NOT taking a transfusion if no one died to obtain the blood? The only value I see is the adherence to a man made organization and the people who dedicate themselves to that organization, to glorify the organization.

Who gains if no transfusion is accepted? Not the person who allowed themselves to die........they died! Not the family, not friends....they all lost. Does God gain? I think not, because His word tells us that those who ate blood are only unclean until morning (Lev 17:15). This hardly indicates a absolute. Does God place a value of ones life? Yes, and that is also in Lev 17:15 as the scripture does not state the penalty is death. Does the organization? Not when it comes to preserving life with no life lost in the process. 

3 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Presumably after the animal has died .... THEN ... AFTER it has died ... the blood represents the animals life.

true, and this is what makes the difference............a transfusion does not require ANYONE to die, but the lack of a transfusion may just require the life of a human. 

On 8/9/2017 at 2:26 PM, Noble Berean said:

At the end of the day, isn't this choice between a Christian and Jehovah God?

YES!

On 8/9/2017 at 2:26 PM, Noble Berean said:

Is it really necessary for the organization to meddle in this private medical choice?

It is if you want to be part of their group. 

On 5/31/2016 at 8:26 AM, John Houston said:

Thw 'law' of the blood, return to the One who created life. In reading verses 5,6 we find the principles of what Jehovah thought about our life giving blood. There is no change of mind in him. Only in the humans who want to forgo this 'law' and do things their way! 

In verses 5,6, yes we do see some principles laid out. These have to do with eating meat with blood and the act of killing/murder. Context tells us this as well as supporting scriptures in Leviticus 17. One thing I found very interesting is that in Leviticus 17, where God tells us about blood and the prohibitions on its use, God tells us also a different set of circumstances with different punishments. In Genesis 9 God said that blood is not to be used as food, and this is again stated in Leviticus 17 but notice the part in verse 15 where God tells us what happens if we DO eat part of an animal which has not been drained of its blood:

15 "When any person eats an animal which dies or is torn by beasts, whether he is a native or an alien, he shall wash his clothes and bathe in water, and remain unclean until evening; then he will become clean."

So whats the deal? Unclean vs. death? Wouldn't it make sense and fit with scripture if God was meaning to not eat blood...ok, got it, and ALSO not to kill/murder. The scriptures tell us that God will require the blood of a man who has taken another's life/blood. But here in verse 15 of Lev 17, we see that God requires us to remain unclean until morning if we eat blood. That's not quite the same thing now is it? For the organization to require people to die instead of taking a transfusion, they are over stepping and adding to what God has told us through His Word. There is a reason for the separate distinction, it is because one is killing/murdering an other human being (hence the last statement at Gen 9:6) who was made in the image of God and the other is that of a beast/animal. God places higher value over people than beast, and it is also why there is a higher value of the blood of man over the blood of a beast. People generally do not eat human blood, and intravenous is not eating nor is it taking a life for the preservation of another life. Animal blood on the other hand IS consumed regularly by people.  

Did you wish my comment into the cornfield Anthony? That's a fine thing to do Anthony, real fine. ----It's a good life

When you suppress everything that does not agree with you, then you are left with a very narrow view of what reality is like. 

21 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Well ... I do not think anyone can legitimately accuse me of not having TRIED to make this a discussion ABOUT WHAT IS MORAL, AND WHAT IS NOT.

I give up....

 

So what is the moral of the story?  "Don't give up" LOL

I don't think that morality even comes into play in this scenario. The money belongs to dead people and dead people have no use for it.   

Regardless of age, isn't this cartoon direct and to the point? Isn't that EXACTLY the way it is?