Jehovah Witnesses

[Secret Chief]

Oh Gods! Am I becoming @Frank Goad ?

Chocolate eclairs first, rubber grommets second.

 

[Eyes to See]

@The Hammer , I’m just now seeing this.

Briefly, Jesus himself indicated two groups which would have God’s blessing.

If you read Matthew 25 from verse 31 on, you’ll read about 3 groups:
1) sheep,
2) goats, and in vs.40...
3) brothers (and sisters) of Christ.

The goats are not looked w/ favor, but the sheep are. So one group there, having God’s — and Jesus’ — favor.

Then there are those whom Jesus calls his “brothers”. (And some translations includes “sisiters,” which is fine.)

They must be in an approved condition, if Jesus refers to them as kin. The account (Matt.25) indicates that, too.

Simply put, those brothers and sisters of Christ are chosen, and they make up the 144,000, in Revelation 7 & Revelation 14.
Those 144,000 are “chosen” for a purpose, to rule as kings w/ Jesus (Revelation 5:10).
But kings need subjects, right? (Doesn’t every king have loyal subjects?) Those subjects are the sheep, from Matthew 25.

So really, from our understanding of the Scriptures, there are two groups who “will be saved”, as the expression goes....those who are chosen to rule with Christ in heaven, and the sheep (which constitute billions of people) who will be their subjects and live forever here on Earth, under their beneficial rulership in the Kingdom.


There are many, many more Scriptures we use to support this understanding, but I wanted to cover the basics.

Hope it makes sense.

This isn't a reply to HockeyCowboy, just quoted it to add a little more to reply to the OP.

During the time in Matthew 25 Jehovah's Witnesses have come to an understanding Jesus is talking about his return to judge the nations in the future and before Armageddon. If you read the chapter to get the context you can understand why. Now in the previous chapter 24, Jesus gives the sign of the last days. Now he says in verses 29-31 that after the great tribulation of those days the sign of the son of man would appear in heaven, and Jesus would send his angels to gather his chosen ones. Jehovah's Witnesses understand these chosen ones to be the 144,000 who will be resurrected to heavenly life.

"When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit down on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will put the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left."- Matthew 25:31-33.

Now after those chosen ones, the 144,00 are all in heaven with spirit bodies as Jehovah God, and his son Jesus Christ, then Jesus will sit down on his throne to judge humankind, and separate people as sheep or goats. And the determining factor on how they are judged it shows us is how they treated Jesus' brothers:

"Then the King will say to those on his right: ‘Come, you who have been blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the founding of the world. 35 For I became hungry and you gave me something to eat; I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and you received me hospitably; 36 naked and you clothed me. I fell sick and you looked after me. I was in prison and you visited me.’ 37 Then the righteous ones will answer him with the words: ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and receive you hospitably, or naked and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 In reply the King will say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’"-verses 34-40.

So the sheep here are judged based on how they treated the anointed Christians. These will be saved through Armageddon and will be granted everlasting life on earth:

"The righteous will possess the earth, And they will live forever on it."-Psalm 37:20.


Think about it. The way you treat Jehovah's spirit-anointed and adopted sons, Jesus' adopted brothers, is the way you treat Jesus himself. If Jesus was still on earth you would treat him exactly the way you treat those whom God has chosen. It doesn't matter if you know who God's adopted sons on earth are or not for you to treat them kindly. Because you are either a kind person or you are not. But if you are a kind person and you come across God's chosen, you will treat them accordingly, and God will deal with you accordingly. That is why he tells the wicked goats:

“Then he will say to those on his left: ‘Go away from me, you who have been cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels. 42 For I became hungry, but you gave me nothing to eat; and I was thirsty, but you gave me nothing to drink. 43 I was a stranger, but you did not receive me hospitably; naked, but you did not clothe me; sick and in prison, but you did not look after me.’ 44 Then they too will answer with the words: ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison and did not minister to you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, saying: ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of these least ones, you did not do it to me.’" -verses 41-45.

These goats may even think they love God and serve Jesus, but they will be judged according to the treatment they handed out to God's anointed ones, even the very least of Jesus' brothers.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODSingToJah/pub-jwbnw_201602_146_VIDEO

 

[cataway]

This isn't a reply to HockeyCowboy, just quoted it to add a little more to reply to the OP.

During the time in Matthew 25 Jehovah's Witnesses have come to an understanding Jesus is talking about his return to judge the nations in the future and before Armageddon. If you read the chapter to get the context you can understand why. Now in the previous chapter 24, Jesus gives the sign of the last days. Now he says in verses 29-31 that after the great tribulation of those days the sign of the son of man would appear in heaven, and Jesus would send his angels to gather his chosen ones. Jehovah's Witnesses understand these chosen ones to be the 144,000 who will be resurrected to heavenly life.

"When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit down on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will put the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left."- Matthew 25:31-33.

Now after those chosen ones, the 144,00 are all in heaven with spirit bodies as Jehovah God, and his son Jesus Christ, then Jesus will sit down on his throne to judge humankind, and separate people as sheep or goats. And the determining factor on how they are judged it shows us is how they treated Jesus' brothers:

"Then the King will say to those on his right: ‘Come, you who have been blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the founding of the world. 35 For I became hungry and you gave me something to eat; I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and you received me hospitably; 36 naked and you clothed me. I fell sick and you looked after me. I was in prison and you visited me.’ 37 Then the righteous ones will answer him with the words: ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and receive you hospitably, or naked and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 In reply the King will say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’"-verses 34-40.

So the sheep here are judged based on how they treated the anointed Christians. These will be saved through Armageddon and will be granted everlasting life on earth:

"The righteous will possess the earth, And they will live forever on it."-Psalm 37:20.


Think about it. The way you treat Jehovah's spirit-anointed and adopted sons, Jesus' adopted brothers, is the way you treat Jesus himself. If Jesus was still on earth you would treat him exactly the way you treat those whom God has chosen. It doesn't matter if you know who God's adopted sons on earth are or not for you to treat them kindly. Because you are either a kind person or you are not. But if you are a kind person and you come across God's chosen, you will treat them accordingly, and God will deal with you accordingly. That is why he tells the wicked goats:

“Then he will say to those on his left: ‘Go away from me, you who have been cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels. 42 For I became hungry, but you gave me nothing to eat; and I was thirsty, but you gave me nothing to drink. 43 I was a stranger, but you did not receive me hospitably; naked, but you did not clothe me; sick and in prison, but you did not look after me.’ 44 Then they too will answer with the words: ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison and did not minister to you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, saying: ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of these least ones, you did not do it to me.’" -verses 41-45.

These goats may even think they love God and serve Jesus, but they will be judged according to the treatment they handed out to God's anointed ones, even the very least of Jesus' brothers.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODSingToJah/pub-jwbnw_201602_146_VIDEO

oh so many dont understand Matthew 24:5 the goats also know of Jesus ,they are even saying nice things about him ...how ever

 

[InChrist]

no maybe you dont realize that the apostles were the first to be chosen. they died some time ago . the ones that are asked to fill a position in the kingdom happens through out time ,not all at once as you may want to think.

Yes, Jesus chose His Apostles to establish His church and spread the gospel. That was a separate mission than that of the 144,000 during the Tribulation period.



“Nothing in the passage leads to interpreting the 144,000 as anything but a literal number of Jews—12,000 taken from every tribe of the children of Israel, according to verses 5–8.

These 144,000 Jews are “sealed,” which means they have the special protection of God. They are kept safe from the divine judgments and from the wrath of the Antichrist. They can freely perform their mission during the tribulation.“

Who are the 144,000? | GotQuestions.org

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, they are not.
And I asked for JW publication references, not references from sites with an anti-JW agenda.
(That’s like getting info from Ken Ham about evolution.)



I’ve presented many lines of evidence. This is not the thread to continue with that.

The JW references are listed in the article. The JW's likely do not keep records, or at least allow easy access to them, of their endless screw ups. Your demand was unreasonable and therefore ignored.

One would go to the Jehovah's Witnesses for what they believe now. They do not appear to be a valid source for what they believed in the past.

 

[Eyes to See]

The JW references are listed in the article. The JW's likely do not keep records, or at least allow easy access to them, of their endless screw ups. Your demand was unreasonable and therefore ignored.

One would go to the Jehovah's Witnesses for what they believe now. They do not appear to be a valid source for what they believed in the past.

This is false.

 

[Subduction Zone]

This is false.

Really? Why?

 

[Eyes to See]

Really? Why?

Here is a good start, it is a book about the history of Jehovah's Witnesses. I recommend you read it, although it is a long read, around 750 pages or so. It isn't a little book either. It is encyclopedia sized. It goes into great depth into changes made in the organization and its teachings over the years.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101993053


Another book on the history of Jehovah's people and changes made in its understanding of Bible prophecy, and their own conduct, such as doing away with pagan symbols such as the cross worship, and pagan holidays such as Christmas and Ester.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/gods-kingdom/

If you want to do some real in depth research in Jehovah's Witness literal about any subject you may consult their Indexes which compile and Index all their works printed dating back to 1930:

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/library/r1/lp-e/all-publications/publications-index

In the Index you can look up any changes that have been made to their understanding of Bible truth over the years. All of this is freely available to the public. I recommend you take the time to read from the source. It is all there. I know, I've done the research. Over the years I have read almost all the publications Jehovah's Witnesses have published, and have all of them in my private library, or stored on my computer. What you are saying is a gross lie actually.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Here is a good start, it is a book about the history of Jehovah's Witnesses. I recommend you read it although it is along read, around 750 pages or so, and this isn't a little book either, it is encyclopedia sized:

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101993053


Another book on the history of Jehovah's people:

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/gods-kingdom/

If you want to do some real in depth research in Jehovah's Witness literal about any subject you may consult their Indexes which compile and Index all their works printed dating back to 1930:

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/library/r1/lp-e/all-publications/publications-index

In the Index you can look up any changes that have been made to their understanding of Bible truth over the years. All of this is freely available to the public. I recommend you take the time to read from the source. It is all there. I know, I've done the research. Over the years I have read almost all the publications Jehovah's Witnesses have published, and have all of them in my private library, or stored on my computer. What you are saying is a gross lie actually.

I am sorry, but you are trying to use circular reasoning. History shows that they are not the best source about themselves. To be reliable you would need an independent source.

If I said that I was completely honest and referred to myself saying so in print to "prove" that I was completely honest would that prove that claim or not?

 

[Eyes to See]

I am sorry, but you are trying to use circular reasoning. History shows that they are not the best source about themselves. To be reliable you would need an independent source.

Welp, when everything they've ever published is available to the public, and free, and Indexed for you, you have no legs to stand on with your false accusations.

I just gave you exactly what you asked for and you just ignored it. So who really isn't to be trusted?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Welp, when everything they've ever published is avai Sorry, lable to the public, and free, and Indexed for you, you have no legs to stand on with your false accusations.

I just gave you exactly what you asked for and you just ignored it. So who really isn't to be trusted?

They claim it is. That does not mean that it is true. Sorry, but history trumps a biased source.

 

[Eyes to See]

They claim it is. That does not mean that it is true. Sorry, but history trumps a biased source.

Are you sure about that? You've checked the Index list and the books I've provided you already? I would like to see the evidence you have. I have provided enough, more than enough to counter your accusation.

Now let us reason this out. You have many accusations, and yet nothing to back them up with. Now a wondering mind, and a logical one, would ask, why do you use lies to try and prove a point? If you are giving false testimony, and ignoring the facts and proofs given you, what is the purpose? What type of person are you?

***mod edit***

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are you sure about that? You've checked the Index list and the books I've provided you already? I would like to see the evidence you have. I have provided enough, more than enough to counter your accusation.

Now let us reason this out. You have many accusations, and yet nothing to back them up with. Now a wondering mind, and a logical one, would ask, why do you use lies to try and prove a point? If you are giving false testimony, and ignoring the facts and proofs given you, what is the purpose? What type of person are you?

***mod edit***

I really do not need to. Once again, outside sources that have no self preservation bias appear to contradict those claims I don't need to use a biased source to support my claims. It is that simple.

 

[Eyes to See]

I really do not need to. Once again, outside sources that have no self preservation bias appear to contradict those claims I don't need to use a biased source to support my claims. It is that simple.

Let us reason what just happened through, using say, The New York Times as an example.

Someone claims that The New York Times has changed their viewpoints over the years, but has hidden their agenda up, and you cannot get to know what they used to believe. So someone points out that they can look into the archives of The New York Times for it is all in the public record. But then the person claims that whatever is in the archive is biased because it is from The New York Times. Then say they need to read an outside source to really know what The New York Times published in the past.

You realize how silly that sounds? I hope you do. And you are doing exactly that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let us reason what just happened through, using say, The New York Times as an example.

Someone claims that The New York Times has changed their viewpoints over the years, but has hidden their agenda up, and you cannot get to know what they used to believe. So someone points out that they can look into the archives of The New York Times for it is all in the public record. But then the person claims that whatever is in the archive is biased because it is from The New York Times. Then say they need to read an outside source to really know what The New York Times published in the past.

You realize how silly that sounds? I hope you do. And you are doing exactly that.

We can use sources other than the New York Times archives to check this claim. There are libraries and other resources that will have years and years, some of them well over a hundred years, of New York Times articles. We do not need to go to a potentially biased source to confirm this nor would we. There are others besides the JW's that have a record of what the JW's said. Those are who one would go to.

 

[Eyes to See]

We can use sources other than the New York Times archives to check this claim. There are libraries and other resources that will have years and years, some of them well over a hundred years, of New York Times articles. We do not need to go to a potentially biased source to confirm this nor would we. There are others besides the JW's that have a record of what the JW's said. Those are who one would go to.

You're still looking at The New York Times. Many public libraries, and there are even online public libraries, have literature published by Jehovah's Witnesses over the years. It is all publicly available.

Your accusations have no standing. If you did a modicum of research you would learn that yourself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You're still looking at The New York Times. Many public libraries, and there are even online public libraries, have literature published by Jehovah's Witnesses over the years. It is all publicly available.

Your accusations have no standing. If you did a modicum of research you would learn that yourself.

Correct. And when we use sources outside of JW control we are still looking at publications of the JW's. That is the source one would use.

 

[Eyes to See]

Correct. And when we use sources outside of JW control we are still looking at publications of the JW's. That is the source one would use.

So where is the proof that what is available publicly online from the JW.ORG website in the links I've provided you is different than what was published and is held in a library or in some other person's private collection?

You keep throwing accusation after accusation with nothing to back it up. If you were in a court of law, throwing accusations like you are with nothing to substantiate them, you would be laughed out of court. (Unless of course it was bought off and corrupt, which happens).

 

[Subduction Zone]

So where is the proof that what is available publicly online from the JW.ORG website in the links I've provided you is different than what was published and is held in a library or in some other person's private collection?

You keep throwing accusation after accusation with nothing to back it up. If you were in a court of law, throwing accusations like you are with nothing to substantiate them, you would be laughed out of court. (Unless of course it was bought off and corrupt, which happens).

You do not seem to understand. Since the Jehovah's Witnesses are the one's in doubt here they are simply not a proper source for "proof". They can testify, but they would not be given too much credibility for too many reasons. I don't need to search your source. I can find what I need elsewhere.

 

[Eyes to See]

You do not seem to understand. Since the Jehovah's Witnesses are the one's in doubt here they are simply not a proper source for "proof". They can testify, but they would not be given too much credibility for too many reasons. I don't need to search your source. I can find what I need elsewhere.

Oh I understand. You don't want first hand testimony. You want testimony from opposers and enemies. Any reasonable person can understand what you are doing.