JW's Preach A Different Gospel

jeager106 said:

@Wharton

jeager106 said: ↑
Do you agree that the RCC Pope is directed by God and is God's human channel
to Catholics on earth?

The pope is the final teacher with authority. No more. No less. BTW, there has been only one infallible statement made by a pope.

Does the RCC claim to be the only path to salvation?

No.

Does the RCC make claims that they are the ONLY way to salvation?

No.

Why is this so different from what claims you make about J.W.'s and their doctrine?

I don't have a problem with your "teachers with authority," just what they teach. (Quote)

Catholicism's Ever-Changing Doctrine

Athanasian Creed (ca. 400 AD), wherein one might read:

"Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and entire, he will without a doubt perish in eternity. . . This is the Catholic faith' unless everyone believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved." (Denzinger 39, 30)

"Outside the Church nobody will be saved. (Extra ecclesiam nemo salvatur)" (Origen, In Jesu Nave hom. 3,5)
"One indeed is the universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved . . ." (Lat


Re: concerns that J.W.'s change dogma. I see that as clarification when new discoveries are
made about translation errors of the past and there are many. Most notably about
eternal life, living in heaven if a "good Christian", and the notion of Hell, Damnation and
the Trinity.

People seem to have a problem with the GB but not the Pope? I don't get that at all.
The RCC has changed dogma much over it's long history but they say it's merely
a clarification of dogma.

"Dogmas, as divine truths revealed by God, are eternal and unchangeable. That is why a dogma can never be "re-defined." Yet, in this work you will notice that most of these dogmas have been solemnly defined and/or pronounced more than once. These are not "re-definitions." Rather, they are further definitions and/or clarifications which buttress aspects of a dogma that have come under some form of denial or attack. The content of these denials/attacks was often not anticipated in the preceding pronouncements. Hence, each further definition is a MORE PRECISE definition of the dogma. It is never the opposite. It is never an expansion or widening, and thus changing, of what the dogma holds. It is never an evolution as to the content and substance of a dogma. The reason this is so is, again, because dogmas are immutable. Truth cannot change."(Adam S. Miller, Op. Cit., p. 3)

Just word play.
Those that three words; "Truth cannot change." Sure it can is sure as hell :>) can
change.
"The only permanent in life is change."

Click to expand...

djhwoodwerks said:

JW's, are all clergyman a part of Christendom?

Click to expand...

Wharton said:

You need to read scripture more about how to acceptably get around the law.

Click to expand...

Katzpur said:

Then you can add first century Christianity to your list of false religions, unless you believe that the Apostles were not human leaders.

Oh, katie, how I wish you were not so filled with hatred. Whenever I read a comment like this, I can't help but think of Mark 9:38-41, which says:

And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part. For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.

The Apostles apparently thought that Jesus would be quite proud of them for looking down their noses at someone they apparently worshipped a false Christ and followed a false gospel. Jesus rebuked them and told them not to be so exclusionary in the future, and that "he that is not against us is on our part." I feel very confident that He would tell you exactly the same thing.

Please don't misrepresent Mormonism. I know you would like everyone to hate us as much as you do, but at least get your facts straight.

Click to expand...

katiemygirl said:

One of your Popes refers to her as co- mediator, co-redeemer and co-advocate.

Pope Leo XIII: “The recourse we have to Mary in prayer follows upon the office she continuously fills by the side of the throne of God as Mediatrix of Divine grace; being by worthiness and by merit most acceptable to Him, and, therefore, surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven. Now, this merciful office of hers, perhaps, appears in no other form of prayer so manifestly as it does in the Rosary. For in the Rosary all the part that Mary took as our co-Redemptress comes to us, as it were, set forth, and in such wise as though the facts were even then taking place; and this with much profit to our piety, whether in the contemplation of the succeeding sacred mysteries, or in the prayers which we speak and repeat with the lips.” (Iucunda Semper Expectatione, n. 2)

Click to expand...

JFish123 said:

Well, what are the essential beliefs? What's the afterlife like? What will we be doing? Can we become gods? I'm just curious as if the video was wrong then please explain why and where it was

Click to expand...

JFish123 said:

New International Version
For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, (1Timothy 2:5)
"For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance." (Hebrews 9:15)

Click to expand...

kjw47 said:

Gods word teaches--Jesus is head of the congregation. Ephesians 5:23--All through the bible--Mortal teachers were present.

Click to expand...

Wharton said:

I have no problem with that.

And Paul could not have said that verse without Mary's co-operation, could he?

Click to expand...

katiemygirl said:

All Christians are priests. All Christians are baptized. No Scripture calls all Christians prophets or kings. BCV please.

Christians (priests) offer spiritual sacrifies. Our bodies are living sacrifices.

Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God--this is your true and proper worship (Romans 12:1)

The Levitical priests of the OT offered physical sacrifices. The priests, of the NT offer spiritual sacrifices.

So to answer your question, yes I offer spiritual sacrifices daily.

Our prayers are precious to God and they are seen by Him as sacrifices offered up to Him.

An angel is seen at the altar offering up to God incense mingled with "the prayers of the saints."

And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand (Revelation 8:4)

Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise--the fruit of lips that openly profess his name (Psalm 141:2).

Click to expand...

JFish123 said:

Paul said it as it is the truth, he didn't need Mary's permission, nor he co-operation in that truth.

Click to expand...

katiemygirl said:

Book, chapter, verse please.

Click to expand...

Wharton said:

That's not what I'm implying. Without Mary bearing Jesus, Paul wouldn't be writing that verse as there would be no Jesus and Paul would still be a Jew.

Click to expand...

Wharton said:

Your sacrifices have no value. People have been offering spiritual sacrifices long before Jesus came to no avail. Unless, you tie your sacrifices to the sacrifice of Jesus which has infinite value, they are a waste of time and useless. But there is a way to do that. It's called the Orthodox Divine Liturgy or the Catholic Mass-"An angel is seen at the altar"-where's your altar? Unfortunately, people outside those Churches have no way of doing so. Sad,huh?

BTW, 1 Peter

But you are a chosen people,a royal (King) priesthood (Priest), a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare (Prophet) the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

Click to expand...

Katzpur said:

I am not going to derail a thread on the Jehovah's Witnesses to discuss the essential beliefs of Mormonism. I would be more than happy to discuss that topic with you, but this thread should never have turned into one about Mormonism in the first place.

Click to expand...

JFish123 said:

So Mary gave birth to Jesus and helped raise him. That's all she did. She's not co redeemer or anything though.

Click to expand...

Katzpur said:

It sounds like we're in agreement then.

Click to expand...

katiemygirl said:

What part of "pleasing to God" don't you understand? Do you even get what it means to offer your body as a living sacrifice means? We are living sacrifices when we don't conform to the world around us. It is the will of God for every believer to be a living sacrifice for Jesus Christ. Yet you say offering our bodies as living sacrifices has no value? That our spiritual sacrifices are to no avail where God is concerned? You are showing your Biblical ignorance.

Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God--this is your true and proper worship.

Click to expand...

katiemygirl said:

They will deny their worship of Mary, yet their rosary beads speak louder than their words. It's a ten to one ratio of Our Fathers to one Hail Mary. Then they insist they don't pray to Mary. Uh huh! Right!!

Click to expand...