Jehovah's Witnesses Knocked on My Door

[Enoch07]

Naw. Mormons are more fun. Honest. They are much more relaxed and easy going. More accessible. JW's seem to be so deadly serious most of the time. Plus, Mormons are usually clean cut good looking kids so it's hard not to be affected by their enthusiasm. They also laugh at my jokes so they can't be all bad.

I talked to the Mormons for about 3 years because they kept sending me out this one particular brunette I had the hots for.

Huh? Going to hell you say?

I was like 15 what was I expected to do with a beautiful 18 year old Mormon girl enticing me!!

 

[12jtartar]

If they posted their beliefs, that's one thing, that is not lying. But posting that Revelations 21:4 and 5 says one thing that supports JW beliefs and I look it up and find that they changed it completely, that is lying, plain and simple.

Interpretation is fine but if I quote the bible and purposely change the quote to say what I want it to say, that's no longer interpretation, that is lying.

It's not different than Christians who cherry pick? We all cherry pick but we don't all CHANGE the bible verses to fit our beliefs.

Super Universe,
Please allow me to give a little insight on what you have said. In the first place, a lie is very different from an honest mistake. You must be trying to misguide a person on purpose, or it is not really a lie.
Now, let me ask you something that is very important. Did you research the Scriptures in question, to make sure of exactly what the Scriptures were saying?? Many times there are variant Scriptures, that come from different manuscripts, both being reliable, and no one is completely sure which is more accurate.
Just about the best way to be as sure as is possible, is to compare different translations, and see what they all say. Remember, it is impossible for a human being to translate or even copy the entire Bible, without making a mistake, so comparing translations will show which one differs from the majority. Many times translators translate words technically correct, but not in agreement with the rest of the Bible. Hebrew and Greek have many words, just like in English, that mean different things, but to translate accurately everything translated word must agree with the whole Bible. This is called Intertextuality. Many translators translate the wrong meaning, because they do not understand the whole purpose of God.
God, Himself, has promised that He would protect His words from every Generation, Psalms 12:6,7. This means that the truth of God’s message can always be found, even if some translators mKe a mistake here and there. Very few translators will translate falsely, b ecause of the warnings in the Bible.
Another point to remember, 2Corinthians 10:3-6, tells us that people who tell the truth will be upsetting the majority of people who have strongly intrenched, false beliefs. Also consider what Paul said at 2Timothy 4:2-5. Jesus, Himself, even said that, some people would strongly believe that a person was against God’s message, that they would kill God’s people, believing that they were doing a service to God. That is just how far from the truth that some get, even while they think they are right. So do not be too quick to condemn translators, unless you can prove things yourself, and not what someone told you.

 

[12jtartar]

You cannot at the same time say that Christianity is "singular" and at the same time say it is splintered into factions. If scripture is open to interpretation, then who decides what the correct interpretation is for everybody else on the planet?

Milton Platt,
There is a great difference in True Christianity and Nominal Christians. If you are looking for the truth of God’s word, you must find the Christians that are teaching the same things that the first century Christians taught. God made sure that Christianity got off on a solid foundation, by putting the Apostles as the one who had the true message of God. God even made sure that their leaders, Elders were appointed by Holy Spirit, so that truth would be taught in all the congregations, Acts 20:28-32, 1Corinthians 1:10.
When Paul wrote to Titus, he indicated The there would be a difference between the ones CALLED Christians, and true Christians, calling them Peculiar, and zealous for fine works, Titus 2:11-14. True Christians are very different from nominal Christians, because they take no man’s word for what the Bible says, but can prove what it says to themselves, and anyone who listens to them, 1Timothy 4:15,16, Romans 12:1,2, 14:12, Psalms 146:3,4, 1Peter 3:15, 2Peter 3:15,16, Titus 1:16. Agape!!!

 

[DavidFirth]

I've never had a atheist knock on my door preaching

I've had a few knock on my door wanting me to contribute to this or that. I've had a few people call me and knock on the door wanting my vote.

 

[DavidFirth]

If it makes you feel better part of the reason I'm as well read in the bible as I am is JW have regimented bible study groups throughout the week and you go through it chapter by chapter at a rate of one full read per year, and I did that like 9 years.
So at least some have a studious tradition. I'm sure it's not unique to JWs either.

You were a JW?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I've never had the JWs at my door. I'm kinda glad, honestly. I ran into them in school a lot (they'd stand on the pathway to my university and hand out stuff to passing students), but I didn't know much about their doctrines then.

Proselytizing tends to make me angry. Generally, the evangelizers and missionaries who ignore my "I'm not interested" end up slinking away worriedly and confused when they see how I react to them pressing the issue... and that's when I don't think the teachings the evangelizer wants me to accept hurt kids.

I'm normally a pretty easygoing person in real life, but if only because of the blood transfusion issue, I worry that if I ran into an assertive enough JW, it might turn into a physical altercation. It seems like that harmful doctrine could be enough that I'd be pretty easy to push over the edge in that situation.

 

[DavidFirth]

I've never had the JWs at my door. I'm kinda glad, honestly. I ran into them in school a lot (they'd stand on the pathway to my university and hand out stuff to passing students), but I didn't know much about their doctrines then.

Proselytizing tends to make me angry. Generally, the evangelizers and missionaries who ignore my "I'm not interested" end up slinking away worriedly and confused when they see how I react to them pressing the issue... and that's when I don't think the teachings the evangelizer wants me to accept hurt kids.

I'm normally a pretty easygoing person in real life, but if only because of the blood transfusion issue, I worry that if I ran into an assertive enough JW, it might turn into a physical altercation. It seems like that harmful doctrine could be enough that I'd be pretty easy to push over the edge in that situation.

Have you ever had Mormons at your door? Mormons are very kind people who mostly are not trying to push anything. They teach what they were taught, which is wrong, but that's beside the point, but of all the many Mormons I had come to my door they never tried to push me into anything.

I had some very good and enlightened discussions with Mormons and became good friends with some of them. They didn't stop visiting me when I told them I would never convert to their teaching. They would just politely ask why not and I would tell them why not, using scripture to show them what I believe and how it differs from what they were taught.

One of them later converted to being a Baptist and still exchanges letters and FB messages with my stepson. Another one of them lives close by and we see her every now and then, she is always very polite and a good friend.

 

[Altfish]

I've had a few knock on my door wanting me to contribute to this or that. I've had a few people call me and knock on the door wanting my vote.

What, actually saying, "I am an atheist..."?
I have cold callers, political canvassers, etc. but none in the name of atheism.

 

[Super Universe]

You're missing the key ingredient in discussions like these - the fact that irrational fundamentalist interpretation of the evangelistic proselytizing variety and functional illiteracy in the target audience are bound to lead to confusion. The OP has missed the point that the scriptural references he is reading are a mixture of quotes and citations in which some sentences simply cite (not quote) the scriptural reference to support the point whilst others are direct quotations. Its really not that hard but if he can't handle it I suggest he might just cite Isaiah 29:12 and tell them to give the scroll (oops, I mean the Awake! magazine) to someone else!

You're missing the fact that I am not a fundamentalist. I'm a Urantia Book believer.

You're also missing the fact that I am not against having a different interpretation, what I'm against is changing the verses and then giving a bible reference for that changed verse.

When the change no longer says the same thing as the original verse but the verse is cited as a "reference" and it's done intentionally, not accidentally, that is lying.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Have you ever had Mormons at your door? Mormons are very kind people who mostly are not trying to push anything. They teach what they were taught, which is wrong, but that's beside the point, but of all the many Mormons I had come to my door they never tried to push me into anything.

Not at my door, but there was one incident on a transit bus: I was sitting at the back of the bus and watched as two Mormon missionaries got on and worked their way down the bus, approaching each person in turn, talking with them and offering them pamphlets. Some of the people they did this to were obviously unwilling, but they continued to pester them anyway. That was one of the times I mentioned: when a missionary was taken aback by my reaction to them.

Since then, some of the Mormons here have said that those missionary's tactics aren't sanctioned by the LDS Church.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What, actually saying, "I am an atheist..."?
I have cold callers, political canvassers, etc. but none in the name of atheism.

Last month, I had a couple of guys from the local mosque come by while I was mowing the lawn. They gave me a flyer... but it wasn't aimed at converting me; it was aimed at convincing me that Muslims are peaceful, community-minded people.

It wasn't until the next day that I realized why they were doing this: it was a few days before 9/11. I think they were trying to cut down some of the annual backlash they go through. It made me sad that they felt they had to go door to door to tell the people in the community that they didn't need to fear or hate Muslims.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Interpreting is one thing, changing the meaning and putting in your meanings and then giving a biblical reference to your newly changed biblical quote is lying. People are lazy, not everyone checks this stuff, they go with what they want to be true.

Who is more at fault, the naive person who wants to believe what they are told or the ones who purposely change something just to have current relevance and to get more followers?

You think the Bible was translated to English without consideration to 'current relevance', or to gain more followers?

 

[Super Universe]

1 Timothy 6:7-8....."To be sure, there is great gain in godly devotion+along with contentment. 7 For we have brought nothing into the world, and neither can we carry anything out. 8 So, having food and clothing, we will be content with these things."

You do understand the point of introducing a Bible principal to underscore a statement, don't you?

Here is a link to the article about how to survive a disaster....victims of a natural disaster would not be expecting luxuries, but necessities like food water and shelter would be useful.

When Disaster Strikes—Steps That Can Save Lives — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY



Revelation 21:4-5 is the Bible's description of the new world to come under the rulership of Jesus and his "bride". It will be a time when all the things that presently plague mankind will be eliminated.....no more suffering, pain or death.
It is the principle upon which the statement is based. You misunderstood......or perhaps you just don't get it? It wasn't a quotation, it was a citation.



Again, you seem to miss the point. 1 John 5:19 says...."We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one." This is the reason why Jesus said that his disciples were to be "No part of the world." It is ruled from behind the scenes by God's adversary.



Exactly. The Kingdom in which Jesus will rule is not from this world, nor is it part of this world. It is from heaven, from God.



That would be because the divine name (YHWH) was there in the original text. The real substitution was made by taking God's name out of the Bible and substituting the title "LORD" instead. That would be tantamount to reading a novel by a well known writer and substituting "Author" for his personal name. What human author would tolerate such a thing?

Look up Strongs reference for the word "LORD" in that verse. The divine name has been removed almost 7,000 times in the Hebrew scriptures. The NWT put it back where it belongs.

Genesis 1:1 (NASB)



Are you really that bad at reading and comprehension? Paul is saying that physical training IS beneficial, but not the sort that would keep us from our primary activity. Paul often made reference to the games that were popular at the time. Much training was needed to compete at what was Olympic level in those days. So he said.....

"By giving this counsel to the brothers, you will be a fine minister of Christ Jesus, one nourished with the words of the faith and of the fine teaching that you have followed closely. 7 But reject irreverent false stories, like those told by old women. On the other hand, train yourself with godly devotion as your aim. 8 For physical training is beneficial for a little, but godly devotion is beneficial for all things, as it holds promise of the life now and the life that is to come. 9 That statement is trustworthy and deserves full acceptance. 10 This is why we are working hard and exerting ourselves, because we have rested our hope on a living God, who is a Savior of all sorts of men, especially of faithful ones."

He was promoting a much more important work.
You seem to have little knowledge of scripture and poor comprehension of what little you know.



This is again citing a principle to back up a statement.

Here is the article that it was quoted from....it was talking about thrill seeking.

Is Thrill-Seeking Worth the Risk? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

I think you've embarrassed yourself enough.

For goodness sake, if you are going to rubbish someone, at least get your facts straight. Regardless of how you feel about Jehovah's Witnesses, they are fulfilling the command given by Jesus to preach the kingdom message in all the world. (Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:19-20) Whether people listen or not, they can never say that we didn't try to warn them about what is coming. (Matthew 10:11-15)

Look at the state of the world people.....it means something.

Do I understand the point of introducing a bible principal to underscore a statement? I do, why change it? Why add in a few words here and there? What is the difference between what the bible really says "So, having food, clothing, we will be content with these things," and what the JW's wrote "To survive, we need clean water, food, clothing, and shelter from the weather." The difference is that modern JW's know you need more than just food and clothing to survive so they added in the word "clean" and they added "and shelter from the weather," to make it sound like the bible has relevance for today. As if it has everything you need and you don't need to go to public school, just go to our JW school and only be friends with JW's. That's control.

Revelation 21:4, 5 is the bibles description of the new world? All the books of the bible were written as stand alone books. They were not meant to be grouped together. They were written separately and chosen to be combined into one book hundreds of years later.

Jesus and His "bride"? What bride?

The statements reflect the meaning in bible verses? Not when they are changed they don't. I was forced to attend Kingdom Hall services for 12 years. I know all your tricks.

I miss the point, John says "We know that we originate with God but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one." No, you miss the point, John was in prison when he had his vision and told one of his followers who visited him about it. Jesus did not begin to preach to the people until AFTER John was killed. This Jesus quote was added to Revelations long after Jesus had been crucified. And being "no part of this world" doesn't mean separate from it entirely. It means to understand that people crave money and power and that those things are temporary earthly things.

And God does not have an adversary. Lucifer rebelled against Jesus, not God.

The divine name (YHWH) was there in the original text? What the original text says is "I AM". It does not say "Call me I AM." I AM means I exist. The voice did not give a name. No one knows God's name because He's never revealed it.

Am I that bad at reading comprehension? Everyone who is not a JW must be, right? Because everything JW's do has to be better. What great new philosophies have JW's given the world? What great new inventions and discoveries, can you name all of them for us? I'm sure there must be many.

Here's the truth behind the "Physical training is beneficial for a little" quote, the Greeks had physical competitions. The Jews did not compete in physical competitions and looked down upon it because it was a different culture. The Greeks had many gods. The Jews had one God. This bible quote is from a Jew who became a Christian who was trying to figure out what traditions Christians would practice. It's not the word of God, it's not even the word of Jesus. It's from a simple primitive early christian and does not carry the same value as something Jesus said and you can't tell the difference. To you, if it's in the bible it's all the word of God. It's not.

The article is talking about thrill seeking? When did Jesus say that people should not find excitement? Just because all the JW's I knew were cowardly and afraid doesn't mean that other people should also be cowardly and afraid all the time. Your rules are your rules, they're not God's rules.

JW's are fulfilling the command given by Jesus to preach the kingdom message in all the world? Jesus did not say to torture your children by making them go up to other people's houses and preach what you want them to preach. Jesus did not say to avoid blood transfusions. Jesus did not say to not defend your family or country. Jesus did not say to take a primitive humans dream (Revelations) and put it above other things that Jesus really did say. Jesus did not say to follow the incorrect ideas invented by Charles Taze Russell.

 

[Super Universe]

You think the Bible was translated to English without consideration to 'current relevance', or to gain more followers?

I think the bible was translated to English without consideration to current relevance or to gain more followers? Of course it was translated into English to gain more followers. I have no problem with translation, my problem is with purposely changing it and still going around saying "It's the word of God!"

Was the bible translated to English without consideration to current relevance? You're suggesting that when the bible was translated from Greek to English things were added. I will look at your evidence if you can provide it. Also, I don't know when the bible was first translated to English but it must have been hundreds of years ago so if any "current relevance" was added it's hundreds of years old.

 

[DavidFirth]

What, actually saying, "I am an atheist..."?
I have cold callers, political canvassers, etc. but none in the name of atheism.

Well, I meant "secular" rather than "atheist."

 

[DavidFirth]

Not at my door, but there was one incident on a transit bus: I was sitting at the back of the bus and watched as two Mormon missionaries got on and worked their way down the bus, approaching each person in turn, talking with them and offering them pamphlets. Some of the people they did this to were obviously unwilling, but they continued to pester them anyway. That was one of the times I mentioned: when a missionary was taken aback by my reaction to them.

Since then, some of the Mormons here have said that those missionary's tactics aren't sanctioned by the LDS Church.

I believe those missionaries were not evangelizing in harmony with other Mormons but just doing their own thing. I've never seen a Mormon push anything on anybody.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well, I meant "secular" rather than "atheist."

Are you counting door-to-door salespeople selling eavestroughs and driveway paving as "secular"?

 

[DavidFirth]

Are you counting door-to-door salespeople selling eavestroughs and driveway paving as "secular"?

Yes. They certainly aren't pedaling religion.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe those missionaries were not evangelizing in harmony with other Mormons but just doing their own thing.

If you send a huge number of teenagers out into the world to preach your religion, not all of them are going to do a perfect job of it.

I've never seen a Mormon push anything on anybody.

And I have. It's not reflective of every Mormon missionary, but it's part of the mix.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes. They certainly aren't pedaling religion.

But the people doing it are religious more often than not.