Ask about Jehovah's Witnesses

[WitnessofJah]

Your organization can try and interpret the Bible.... just tell me where you're Bible came from.... did it fall from heaven complete? How do you know the right books are included? How do you know that some divine writing was not excluded? You organization (and those like it) seems to forget that Christ was not a mere figure in a book... the Apostles carried on the message of the Gospel and CONTINUED to teach before, during, and after the writing of Scripture.

By your comment, I am assuming you are trying to say that our Bible (the NWT) has been changed or given a “slant” to promote our teachings. You could not be further from the truth. If anything, it is among one of the closest translations to the original manuscripts ever and has been translated from highly acclaimed sources like the Septuagint and many other highly reputable Greek and Hebrew manuscripts.



Before you analyze my Bible, let’s have a look at yours. Why has your Bible excluded God’s name of “Jehovah/Yaweh” in most cases even though they fully appear in the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures? It’s not exactly what I would define as “accuracy”.



Jesus to us is not at all “a figure in a book” – he is second to God in the universe and is God’s son – not higher or lower. I’m not sure where you deducted that one from and when.



You say that the Apostles preached about the Trinity in the Gospels…would you like to kindly show us where?

What makes you think that your organization started by a man.... not chosen by Christ as an Apostle..... some 2,000 or so years later is better suited to interpret the Bible than those 1st and 2nd century Christians.... many of whom were taught by the APOSTLES themselves?

A man did not start our organization, he simply re-discovered what was already there – the truth. And by judging what you said, you seem to assume that Jesus chose Trinitarians. Jesus told people to follow him (Matt 16:24) and at the very least, be obedient to him. If you look at mainstream Christianity, they discreetly sweep most of his commandments under the rug and do it their own way. On the otherhand, Jehovah’s Witness follow God’s every commandment – convenient or not and with full devotion. 2000 years of Trinitarian history means nothing if you do the exact opposite of what God is asking of you.

Again, as soon as you can explain to me where your Bible came from.... the Bible itself is a product of tradition.

You keep saying the word “tradition”. Would you like to elaborate on the “traditions” you are talking about? The Bible is a result of divine inspiration from God – from the heavens to the paper. Over millenniums, this book has come down in history in tact so that we can see what we see today. The traditions and cultures you talk about affected the content of the Bible, however, did not change it’s teachings! What God intended to put in the Bible would have been put in there anyway – irregardless of the traditions of the local people. To say this would be to deny the power of God.

What's your point?

Several Biblical stories were pre-dated by other cultures... the garden of eden, the flood, the messiah....

I guess that means most of the Bible is invalid and the Bible itself as incorrect as the Trinity.



I don't think that was the point you were trying to make, was it?

The Bible itself invalidates the Trinity, what more proof do you want? You’re not getting the point. You are trying to justify the Trinity via every other means apart from the evidence that really matters – the Bible. The word “Trinity” does not appear in the Bible a single time…coincidence or what? This is just one of many hundreds of flaws in the Trinity.



If I had to go through everything that mainstream Christianity that conflicts with the Bible, it would take me weeks – but yes, you have 2000 years under your belt so you must be right. Not really. On the otherhand, I would like to see you say what Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t do either…and see how many hit’s you get.

 

[maike]

Do Jehovah's Witnesses eat meat ???

 

[Scott1]

we've strayed quite abit away from an evidence vs evidence argument, shall we return?

Nah.... I grow bored quite easily of "linguistic gymnastics" as a fellow poster is fond of saying I'm afraid.

I've got everything I need to know:

now i never said everything the rcc ever did is false

That's enough for me.

a divine organization wouldn't need a reformation would it?

It's comments like this that speak volumes.... what make you think it was the Church that needed "reformation".... and not the possibility that it was a sin to leave? Your bias. Plain and simple.

to say believing one makes the other one true is also to say that the inquisition amongst many other rcc activities was right.

And this is the final nail.... when all else fails, bring up the inquisition or crusades... to those who have been on this apologist merry-go-round before, it just shows a lack of understanding between historical actions and theological teaching. There are still sinners in my Church.... to think bringing up the inquisition means anything is as stupid as the notion that if Gallileo were to rob a gas station (OK silly notion, but play along) that would somehow nullify truth.

Peace to you my friend.... till we chat again,
Scott

 

[cardero]

WitnessOfJah, I believe that there is a scripture in the New Testament that explains that Jesus taught the apostles to heal and preach and probably do some of the miracles that Jesus presented during his ministry. What this event entails for me is that that the understanding to perform these "miracles" could BE learned by humans. My question is whatever happened to these teachings, these "gifts" that Jesus taught to his followers? Were they exclusive just to that congregation after the death of Jesus? Would not the evidence of these miraculous teachings BE required today and help in recognizing the religion that comes in GOD's name?

 

[Scott1]

OK.... on to your post Witness....... I'm getting carpal tunnel here folks!

By your comment, I am assuming you are trying to say that our Bible (the NWT) has been changed or given a “slant” to promote our teachings.

Nope... not what I meant at all.

If anything, it is among one of the closest translations to the original manuscripts ever and has been translated from highly acclaimed sources like the Septuagint and many other highly reputable Greek and Hebrew manuscripts.

Well... I won't get into what "original" manuscripts you have... for now....

A few quick questions: How many books are in your Bible?

How did the leaders of your faith decide which books to include in the Old Testament?
In the New Testament?

Before you analyze my Bible, let’s have a look at yours. Why has your Bible excluded God’s name of “Jehovah/Yaweh” in most cases even though they fully appear in the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures? It’s not exactly what I would define as “accuracy”.

Like I said before... I care not what your Bible says.... I am just curious how it came to be.... but feel free to attack away.

Jesus to us is not at all “a figure in a book” – he is second to God in the universe and is God’s son – not higher or lower. I’m not sure where you deducted that one from and when.

I'll explain that one a bit later..... let's focus on where your Bible came from for now... and then it should become clearer.

You say that the Apostles preached about the Trinity in the Gospels…would you like to kindly show us where?

Nope.... I don't believe I did. I think your again using the mistaken assumption that the entire work of the Apostles in contained in the Bible.... they did also teach the "old fashioned" way = orally.

If you look at mainstream Christianity, they discreetly sweep most of his commandments under the rug and do it their own way.

I was wondering how long it would take for you to jump on the moral high horse.... I will not play along.... God bless all of you JW's who lead a moral life..... judge away, my friend.

On the otherhand, Jehovah’s Witness follow God’s every commandment – convenient or not and with full devotion. 2000 years of Trinitarian history means nothing if you do the exact opposite of what God is asking of you.

Wow... that's remarkable.... every JW follow's God's every commandment without error and without sin... you must be very holy people indeed.
.... and us silly "mainstream" Christians doing the exact opposite.

Please continue with this..... I'd love to hear more about how perfect JW's are and how we are not........

..... of course, after you answer my Bible questions please!

Scott

 

[HelpMe]

the irony of the situation scott is that you fail to use the bible in any of your arguments.peter didn't start the roman church, nor was he the first pope.

In 495 A.D., Pope Gelasius declared that the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary is a heresy, and that people who teach it are heretics. In the sixth century, Pope Hormisdas declared that anyone teaching this doctrine is a heretic. Two "infallible" popes both declared that this doctrine is a heresy. Then, on November 1, 1950, Pope Pius XII (another "infallible" pope) declared that the same doctrine is official Roman Catholic dogma, which all Catholics are required to believe.

Jews and conservative Christians alike have recognized the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament as inspired. Evangelical Protestants have recognized the twenty-seven books of the New Testament as inspired. Roman Catholics have a total of eighty books because they recognize the Apocrypha as semicanonical.Since the books were inspired when they were written, they were already canonical and possessed authority as being a part of God’s Word. The responsibility of the church was simply to attest to the fact of their inspiration.

If we believe that God exists as an almighty God, then revelation and inspiration are clearly possible.Not everything an apostle wrote was inspired, for it was not the writer who was inspired but his writings, and not necessarily all of them.In Romans 3:2 we are told that the “oracles of God,” the Old Testament Scripture, had been entrusted to the Jews; they were to be the custodians of the Old Testament.would you like the rcc to have responsibility for this?

Even more important was the witness of the Muratorian Canon (A.D. 170), which was a compilation of books recognized as canonical at that early date by the church. The Muratorian Canon included all the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and one epistle of John.

The Roman Catholic Church claims that the early Christians were all Roman Catholics and that (aside from the Orthodox Church) all Christians were Roman Catholics until the Protestant Reformation. It also claims that the Apostle Peter was the first Pope, ruling from Rome.lie

 

[Scott1]

the irony of the situation scott is that you fail to use the bible in any of your arguments.peter didn't start the roman church, nor was he the first pope.

This thread is about JW's and I am trying to learn about how JW's (and you for some reason) came to believe what you do about the Bible and specifically the Canon of Scripture.
I should use Scripture to explain the Canon of Scripture?..... that's not ironic.... that's just you not paying attention again. Let's get back on topic, shall we? Start another thread if you'd like to chat about the Papacy.

Evangelical Protestants have recognized the twenty-seven books of the New Testament as inspired.

Again, you fail to answer the question: why?

Since the books were inspired when they were written, they were already canonical and possessed authority as being a part of God’s Word.

Prove it. Why those books and not 400 other writings of the period?

The responsibility of the church was simply to attest to the fact of their inspiration.

Rrrrright... and again, they came to the knowledge that these books in particular were inspired how?

Not everything an apostle wrote was inspired, for it was not the writer who was inspired but his writings, and not necessarily all of them.

So again, this begs the question: who decided which writingswere inspired?

Even more important was the witness of the Muratorian Canon (A.D. 170), which was a compilation of books recognized as canonical at that early date by the church. The Muratorian Canon included all the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and one epistle of John.

The Muratorian Canon?.... what page of the Bible did you find this?
It's not in the Bible? Hmmmm, I wonder who decided later to add Hebrews, James and one epistle of John...... maybe they were wrong...... or was the Muratorian Canon wrong for excluding them?

 

[WitnessofJah]

Do Jehovah's Witnesses eat meat ???

Yes - if they want to that is.

 

[WitnessofJah]

WitnessOfJah, I believe that there is a scripture in the New Testament that explains that Jesus taught the apostles to heal and preach and probably do some of the miracles that Jesus presented during his ministry. What this event entails for me is that that the understanding to perform these "miracles" could BE learned by humans. My question is whatever happened to these teachings, these "gifts" that Jesus taught to his followers? Were they exclusive just to that congregation after the death of Jesus? Would not the evidence of these miraculous teachings BE required today and help in recognizing the religion that comes in GOD's name?

Miracles can't be learned by humans, God either gives you the ability or does'nt. The Apostles were one of the most important biblical figures in the Bible and were given the ability to perform miracles by God via Jesus.

Do we need miracles today to believe? We no longer have miracles like in the biblical era, but because the Bible has now been completed and God's future for mankind has been foretold (unlike Jesus' times and before), we no longer have these miracles - it's all a matter of faith. You have to ask yourself: If I need miracles to be a believer, how really strong is my faith?

However, will miracles happen ever again? Yes. Soon in the future, the ultimate miracle will be performed - Armaggedon - so make sure you're not too late. (Rev 16:16)

 

[WitnessofJah]

A few quick questions: How many books are in your Bible?

66 books altogether in the OT and NT.

How did the leaders of your faith decide which books to include in the Old Testament?
In the New Testament?

They did'nt - the original content of the manuscripts did. Where did you get this idea where we "dropped books"?

Like I said before... I care not what your Bible says.... I am just curious how it came to be.... but feel free to attack away.

I am not attacking! I was simply was asking a question which you did not answer.

Nope.... I don't believe I did. I think your again using the mistaken assumption that the entire work of the Apostles in contained in the Bible.... they did also teach the "old fashioned" way = orally.

If "orally" was the way to go, why did God create the Bible? It impossible to keep oral teachings 100% accurate over milleniums....ever heard of Chinese whispers?

Wow... that's remarkable.... every JW follow's God's every commandment without error and without sin... you must be very holy people indeed.
.... and us silly "mainstream" Christians doing the exact opposite.

We all sin, and we are no exception to it by any stretch of the imagination. However, there is a big difference between sinning knowing you are violating Bible commands and sinning if you are at least trying to do what is right. God can see into our hearts - and that's what matters.

 

[HelpMe]

So again, this begs the question: who decided which writings were inspired?

god.

again, do you believe in divine intervention?

 

[robtex]

When a non Jehovah's witness marries a Jehovah's Witness what is expected from the non Jehovah partner as far as inside the home?

What issues in your workplace or in your fellow congregates workplaces have become issues in regards to religion?

 

[Scott1]

66 books altogether in the OT and NT.
They did'nt - the original content of the manuscripts did. Where did you get this idea where we "dropped books"?

66?

How many books were in the Septuagint OT? Remember this:

If anything(the NWT), it is among one of the closest translations to the original manuscripts ever and has been translated from highly acclaimed sources like the Septuagint

I can see you'll go round and round and not be able to answer a simple question... like our friend HelpMe....

again, do you believe in divine intervention?

Oy vey..... now this is your evidence? ..... remember, you asked to go back to evidence vs. evidence and you dodge simple questions and want to now focus on divine intervention?

Alright atheists.... stop laughing..... it's not polite.:biglaugh:

Scott

 

[Pah]

Old Testament

* Genesis
* Exodus
* Leviticus
* Numbers
* Deuteronomy
* Joshua
* Judges
* Ruth
* 1 Samuel
* 2 Samuel
* 1 Kings
* 2 Kings
* 1 Chronicles
* 2 Chronicles
* Ezra
* Nehemiah
* Tobit
* Judith
* Esther
* 1 Maccabees
* 2 Maccabees
* Job
* Psalms
* Proverbs
* Ecclesiastes
* Song of Songs
* Wisdom
* Sirach
* Isaiah
* Jeremiah
* Lamentations
* Baruch
* Ezekiel
* Daniel
* Hosea
* Joel
* Amos
* Obadiah
* Jonah
* Micah
* Nahum
* Habakkuk
* Zephaniah
* Haggai
* Zechariah
* Malachi

New Testament

* Matthew
* Mark
* Luke
* John
* Acts
* Romans
* 1 Corinthians
* 2 Corinthians
* Galatians
* Ephesians
* Philippians
* Colossians
* 1 Thessalonians
* 2 Thessalonians
* 1 Timothy
* 2 Timothy
* Titus
* Philemon
* Hebrews
* James
* 1 Peter
* 2 Peter
* 1 John
* 2 John
* 3 John
* Jude
* Revelation

Isn't that more than 66?

Bob

 

[Pah]

One of the biggest problems with any faith is the tendancy of the believers to think that was is today is what always was.

Bob

 

[WitnessofJah]

When a non Jehovah's witness marries a Jehovah's Witness what is expected from the non Jehovah partner as far as inside the home?

Nothing is expected from the non-JW partner at all, since he/she is not a believer. On the otherhand, the JW partner is encouraged to show him/her respect and have good conduct.

What issues in your workplace or in your fellow congregates workplaces have become issues in regards to religion?

99% of the time, we get on very well in our work place. The only things that are an issue at all is when birthdays or Christmas parties come up - in which we politely abstain.

 

[WitnessofJah]

SOGFPP and Rah, I'll answer your questions in detail later on. I'm in my lunch break right now so I have'nt got the time.

 

[HelpMe]

I can see you'll go round and round and not be able to answer a simple question... like our friend HelpMe....

well i never said the the Septuagint was reliable, as i believe in Aramaic New Testament Primacy and quite obviously thus in a hebrew ot.

Alright atheists.... stop laughing..... it's not polite.:biglaugh:

just like 'jesus' and his atheist friends?

exactly what question(s) have i avoided?

thanks for not answering my 8 word post consisting of a single question.judging by your post, i would say you believe in practicing open hypocrisy and do not believe in divine intervention?

 

[Scott1]

just like 'jesus' and his atheist friends?

This is priceless..... it adds so much to your crediblity.... thanks.

thanks for not answering my 8 word post consisting of a single question.judging by your post, i would say you believe in practicing open hypocrisy and do not believe in divine intervention?

I sure do believe.... I just want you to answer a few simple questions and give some evidence... you can't seem to do so....

 

[HelpMe]

were you referring to my text or the picture linked?

I sure do believe.... I just want you to answer a few simple questions and give some evidence... you can't seem to do so....

exactly what question(s) have i avoided?

thanks