Watchtower Governing Body: Are They The Exclusive Channel For God??

[JFish123]

pssst, i have a feeling jfish is one of them

No Pegg I assure you i was never a Jehovahs Witness

 

[djhwoodwerks]

The answer to the question is, "No. It is not Christian." Like all non-Christian cults, the Jehovah's Witness' organization distorts the essential doctrines of Christianity. It denies the deity of Christ, His physical resurrection, and salvation by grace. These make it non-Christian. In addition, to support its erring doctrines, the Watchtower organization (which is the author and teacher of all official Jehovah's Witness' theology) has altered the Bible to make it agree with its changing and non-Christian teachings.

*** w10 1/15 p. 31 par. 14 Jehovah’s Way of Ruling Vindicated! ***
14 A few anointed members of “the Israel of God” still remain, and as Jesus’ brothers, they continue to act as “ambassadors substituting for Christ.” (2 Cor. 5:20) They have been appointed as a faithful and discreet slave class to care for and provide spiritual food for anointed ones and a growing crowd of Christians, who now include millions having the hope of living on earth forever. (Matt. 24:45-47; Rev. 7:9-15) Jehovah’s blessing on that arrangement is evident in the spiritual prosperity enjoyed by true worshippers today.


*** w93 9/15 p. 22 They Compassionately Shepherd the Little Sheep ***
But if we were to draw away from Jehovah’s organization, there would be no place else to go for salvation and true joy.

Denying the deity of Christ is very obvious in their teachings.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

*** w10 1/15 p. 31 par. 14 Jehovah’s Way of Ruling Vindicated! ***
14 A few anointed members of “the Israel of God” still remain, and as Jesus’ brothers, they continue to act as “ambassadors substituting for Christ.” (2 Cor. 5:20) They have been appointed as a faithful and discreet slave class.

In the Greek on the left in verse 20, do you see the words "substituting" or "substitutes"? But they appear in the right column of the translation. This is taken from their own Kingdom Interlinear Bible. This is only one example of how their translation has been altered to fit their teaching.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

*** w89 9/1 p. 19 par. 7 Remaining Organized for Survival Into the Millennium ***
7 Only Jehovah’s Witnesses, those of the anointed remnant and the “great crowd,” as a united organization under the protection of the Supreme Organizer, have any Scriptural hope of surviving the impending end of this doomed system dominated by Satan the Devil. (Revelation 7:9-17; 2 Corinthians 4:4)

I would like to point out that the WT does have an editorial department that produces it's materials. That said, they have printed the above statement. Notice that Only JW's have a scriptural hope of surviving armaggedon. Also, notice the scripture reference as proof to this claim. The scripture reference of Rev 7:9-17 contradicts their teaching that the end of this system of things is at the door. If this system of things ends next month, their claim to "Only JW's will survive" will be destroyed.

Aren't there only 8 or 9 million JW's in the world today? Somewhere close to that I believe. But Rev 7:9 says, "After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb." Sounds like a lot more than 8 or 9 million to me.

I do believe though that the reference of 2Cor 4:4 is well applied to the organization of JW's. Because the statement starts out with, "Only Jehovah's Witnesses" and the verse referenced starts out, "In their case."

2Co 4:4 (ESVST) 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

I believe a statement like that is boastful, prideful and arrogant. None of which could come from the only true religion or spirit directed organization of God.

 

[JFish123]

Questions for the Jehovahs Witnesses:

1. If the Watchtower organization rejects others calling them "inspired" yet the Watchtower organization does call themselves "God's Spirit-directed Prophet" what is the difference? Is there such a thing as an "uninspired prophet"?

2. Since the Organization has received "new light" regarding the 1914 generation, and completely changed their view on this, does this mean that all the former Jehovah's witnesses who were disfellowshipped years ago for the same view the organization is now teaching will automatically be accepted into fellowship again? Were these Ex-Jw's in fact disfellowshipped for truth and knew things that the governing body did not?

3. If the name "Jehovah" is so important, then why does Acts 4:12 say, "There is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name [v10 Jesus Christ] under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved"? Would this not have been the logical place for God to have used the name "YHWH"?

4. Since the Jehovah's Witness organization currently rejects most of the teachings of its founder Charles Taze Russell (who was president of the organization from 1879-1916), and since they also reject "Judge" Joseph Franklin Rutherford, who succeeded Russell as president from 1916 - 1942, how can we be sure that in 25 more years, Jehovah's Witnesses won't also reject the current president, Milton G. Henschel (1992 - present), as they did Russell and Rutherford?
What kind of confidence can anyone have in an organization that rejected its founder and first two presidents for the first 63 years of its existence? This represents about 53% of the time they have existed?

5. Jn 1:3 says that Jesus created "all things", but in Isa 44:24, God says that he "by myself" created the heavens and the earth and asks the question "Who was with me?" when the heavens and the earth were created. How can this be since if Jesus was created by God, then he would have been with God when everything else was created?

6. The NWT translates Jn 1:1 as "... and the Word was WITH God, and the Word was a god". How can the Word (Jesus) be "a god" if God says in Deut 32:39, "See now that I-I am he, and there are NO gods together WITH me ..."?

7. If the spirit of a man has no existence apart from the body, why does Stephen just before his death in Acts 7:59, pray to Jesus to "receive my spirit"? How could Jesus receive Stephen's spirit if a man's spirit ceases to exist when the body dies?

8. If Christians are persecuted for the sake of Jehovah's name, why did Christ tell the first Christians that they would be persecuted for the sake of his (Jesus') name instead of Jehovah's (Mt 24:9, Mk 13:13, Lk 21:12, 17, Jn 15:21, and Acts 9:16)?

9. The Bible says that ONLY God is our savior (Hos 13:4, Isa 43:11,45:21, etc.). How can it be then, that the Bible repeatedly says that Jesus Christ is our savior (Lk 2:11, Phil 3:20, Tit 2:13, 3:6, 2Pet 1:1, 2:20, 3:18, etc.)?

10. If the human soul IS the person, how could the soul go out of a person (Gen 35:18) or come back into a person (1Kings 17:21)?

 

[djhwoodwerks]

3. If the name "Jehovah" is so important, then why does Acts 4:12 say, "There is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name [v10 Jesus Christ] under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved"? Would this not have been the logical place for God to have used the name "YHWH"?

This is how, but they don't consider the prior verses that talk about confessing Jesus being Lord.
(Romans 10:13) NWT 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”

Or verses like this.
Phi 2:8-11 (ESVST) . 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him "the" name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

 

[Mountain_Climber]

This is how, but they don't consider the prior verses that talk about confessing Jesus being Lord.
(Romans 10:13) NWT 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”

Or verses like this.
Phi 2:8-11 (ESVST) . 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him "the" name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Acts 4:12 "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."

The name, "Jesus", was literally given under heaven among men. It was given to a man. That man took the place of the first Adam. This was for all of the first Adam's offspring which would otherwise be left to die for Adam's sin. There is no life in the procreative sense really passed from that first Adam but by the grace of God and that on the basis of God's plan of salvation in the last Adam being attributed in advance. And it is by that life in the man Jesus who was the last Adam that we now have hope of being redeemed from the first Adam's condemnation.

The head of the first Adam was Jehovah. The head of the last Adam was Jehovah. Jehovah did not lose our life for us but the one subject to him did. The first Adam did lose our life for us.

Now, for there to be salvation there must be a redemption from that body of Adam wherein we all would have died (for in sinning, the first Adam lost any right to even bare children). God could have put him immediately to death and would have been totally justified to do so. But because of his great love and mercy, he showed us grace by providing a replacement for our first father in whom we all die. Jehovah provided a new father, a last Adam in the flesh, in whom we all might live.

You are so focused on this idea of there being a competition between Jesus and God on the basis of such scriptures as you have there cited, so that you fail to see it is speaking of the passing uncorrupted life and the keeping of that uncorrupted life in the flesh, as that is what is necessary for us to live forever with Jehovah as our God. That is the salvation being spoken of.

That name had to be given under heaven. It would not have worked to give that name in heaven. Giving that name in heaven would not have replaced our fallen human father. And if we have no replacement for our fallen human father, we cannot have any salvation. We would have never been and only are on the basis of that hope in the last Adam administered to us ahead of time in a token sense that we would have the opportunity to willingly embrace that name which Jehovah graciously gave under heaven in the flesh among men.

This is not so difficult if you can resist these know-it-alls like that Dr.James White (who by the way exhibits a poor grasp of Hebrew) so that they don't blind you with their biases.

 

[JayJayDee]

This is how, but they don't consider the prior verses that talk about confessing Jesus being Lord.
(Romans 10:13) NWT 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”

This is a quote from Joel 2:32. The Tetragrammaton is in the original Hebrew. Just because Jesus bears the title "Lord" doesn't make him God. Sarah called Abraham "Lord" was she calling him God? "Lord" is a title, designating a position of authority over someone else....it is not a name.

Or verses like this.
Phi 2:8-11 (ESVST) . 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him "the" name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Can you just read that scripture with some discernment as to what it is actually saying? Think carefully about the words....

Who exalted Christ? God did.
Who gave him a name that is above every other name? God did.
What name is this? (Rev 3:12)
And is this name above the name of Jehovah? (Psalm 83:18KJV)
Can every knee bend to the king of God's kingdom without taking worship away from Jehovah? Yes!
And every tongue that confesses that Jesus is Lord (not God) is to whose glory? Jesus' glory? Or the glory of his God and Father?

It is this kind of spiritual blindness that prevents people from understanding what they read in the Bible. (2 Cor 4:3, 4)

 

[Mountain_Climber]

When it comes to verses like Philippians 2:8-11 what is meant by what Jesus told us in the book of Revelation?

Revelation 3:12 "Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name."

What is that new name if not Jesus?

What is the significance of Jesus' being given a new name?

And are we to forget that this very temple of God which Jesus says there he will make those who conquer to be a pillar in, Jesus himself was said to be the chief cornerstone of at Ephesians 2:20?

Jesus cannot be both a stone of the temple God dwells in and also be God who dwells in that temple, can he?

And let us remember that the 12 Apostles of the Lamb are also foundation stones of that temple in which God dwells, showing God is in them the same way God is in Jesus. So does that then make the twelve Apostles of the Lamb also God?

1 Peter 2:2 as newborn babes, long for the spiritual milk which is without guile, that ye may grow thereby unto salvation;
3 if ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious:
4 unto whom coming, a living stone, rejected indeed of men, but with God elect, precious,
5 ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
6 Because it is contained in scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: And he that believeth on him shall not be put to shame.
7 For you therefore that believe is the preciousness: but for such as disbelieve, The stone which the builders rejected, The same was made the head of the corner;
8 and, A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence; for they stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
9 But ye are a elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that ye may show forth the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
10 who in time past were no people, but now are the people of God: who had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

 

[JFish123]

This is a quote from Joel 2:32. The Tetragrammaton is in the original Hebrew. Just because Jesus bears the title "Lord" doesn't make him God. Sarah called Abraham "Lord" was she calling him God? "Lord" is a title, designating a position of authority over someone else....it is not a name.



Can you just read that scripture with some discernment as to what it is actually saying? Think carefully about the words....

Who exalted Christ? God did.
Who gave him a name that is above every other name? God did.
What name is this? (Rev 3:12)
And is this name above the name of Jehovah? (Psalm 83:18KJV)
Can every knee bend to the king of God's kingdom without taking worship away from Jehovah? Yes!
And every tongue that confesses that Jesus is Lord (not God) is to whose glory? Jesus' glory? Or the glory of his God and Father?

It is this kind of spiritual blindness that prevents people from understanding what they read in the Bible. (2 Cor 4:3, 4)

The same can be said of you sadly as well as the Watchtower, not realizing the Trinity when it's all over the bible. I mean Is that not the definition of spiritual blindness?

 

[Wharton]

The same can be said of you sadly as well as the Watchtower, not realizing the Trinity when it's all over the bible. I mean Is that not the definition of spiritual blindness?
View attachment 10100

What else can be said? Psst. They even know where Jehovah lives.

1927 "The face of the deep, of course, would be toward the Pleiades, which are claimed to be the habitation of Jehovah." (Creation; 1927; 2,175,000 ed.; p. 94)

1928 "The constellation of the seven stars forming the Pleiades appears to be the crowning center around which the known systems of the planets revolve even as our sun's planets obey the sun and travel in their respective orbits. It has been suggested, and with much weight, that one of the stars of that group is the dwelling-place of Jehovah and the place of the highest heavens;..." (Reconciliation; 1928; p. 14)

1928 "The constellation of the Pleiades is a small one compared with others which scientific instruments disclose to the wondering eyes of man. But the greatness in size of other stars or planets is small when compared with the Pleiades in importance, because the Pleiades is the place of the eternal throne of God." (Reconciliation; 1928; p. 14)

 

[Wharton]

BTW, if they all had followed the "exclusive channel," we wouldn't need to be in this thread.

1938 "...mark the words of Jesus, which definitely seem to discourage the bearing of children immediately before or during Armageddon....It would therefore appear that there is no reasonable or scriptural injunction to bring children into the world immediately before Armageddon, where we now are." (Watchtower, Nov. 1, 1938, p. 324)

 

[savagewind]

BTW, if they all had followed the "exclusive channel," we wouldn't need to be in this thread.

1938 "...mark the words of Jesus, which definitely seem to discourage the bearing of children immediately before or during Armageddon....It would therefore appear that there is no reasonable or scriptural injunction to bring children into the world immediately before Armageddon, where we now are." (Watchtower, Nov. 1, 1938, p. 324)

I met a JW woman who did just that. She might be the most righteous person I ever met. She evangelized full time before full time "pioneering" was rewarded with all kinds of accolades. She was married to an elder who seemed to put her below his theocratic responsibilities. She never complained to anyone I believe. I loved her.

 

[james2ko]

have you ever considered that God had the bible written this way because he does not think in material terms the way we do. If the bible was a book of men, it would be as phyisical and literal as the many myths and other written words of men. But the bible is written in a way that only God can describe and im pretty sure that is why it requires help from the holy spirit to grasp the meaning of many of its passages.

1. The inspired men who authored the scriptures have nothing to do with the manner in which it is interpreted. Symbolism and metaphor certainly have there place in scripture, but much too often, we get carried away and lose out on the simple literal meaning God intended all along. We must establish doctrine based on what we read in scripture, not establish scripture based on our doctrine. Unfortunately, the WT has done the latter with the doctrine of the kingdom of God.

I mean just look at the book of Revelation... are you going to claim that its all to be taken literally??? locust plagues with the heads of lions breathing fire???? No one in the their right mind would assume that its to be taken literally.

2. We must also be mindful of context. Since we believe the book of revelation is written about events occurring at a much later time, we should not dismiss the idea, that at times, John may have been struggling to describe "real" modern day objects utilizing first century semantics.

And what of Ezekiel's vision of the Chariot of God... many have concluded that Ezekiel was seeing an alien space craft because they too think of it in literal terms.

3. You are rendering two different realms as equal. Our reality is not God's reality (Isa 58:8-9). Just because it sounds alien to us, is it to God? Of course not. Are the living creatures around God's throne "literal" or "symbolic" to God? Their foreign appearance (foreign to us) may have some figurative connotation, but they are "real" creatures. It would not be far-fetched for the creatures and objects in Ezekiel's vision to also be "real" and normal to God and the heavenly hosts. This is why I believe all of our animals were patterned after some of them. Based on some of the descriptions in scripture, from our perspective, heaven would look like a Star Wars bar scene.

The most amazing thing about Gods Word is that he actually gave us a literal examples of many future events by means of the Isrealite nation. The christians called many of the accounts in there 'prophetic dramas'. Abrahams test to offer up his son was a prophetic drama showing us what God himself would do when he would offer his own son as a sacrifice for mankind. Sending Ishmael and Hagar away into the wilderness was a prophetic drama of the people born under two covenants...the slave woman corresponded to earthly Jerusalem who's people failed to accept the Messiah and thus remained in slavery to the Law. Whereas, Sarah, the free woman, corresponded to “the Jerusalem above,” who produces sons in accord with what was foretold in the Abrahamic covenant....these ones are free of the law because sin is no more in them, they have been forgiven under the new covenant arrangement put in place by Christ through his Ransom.

4. These are obvious similes . We should interpret literally unless the sense implies an impossibility, a contradiction, or absurdity. Multi-headed creatures coming out of our oceans wearing crowns was an absurdity/impossibility in the first century, signaling a symbolic inference. In one case, we know it was symbolic because an explanation was provided for the monstrous symbols (Rev 17). Men and women walking down the street and sitting together in a city square, while children play is neither absurd or impossible:

Zec 8:3 "And now the LORD says: I am returning [the Hebrew term "shoob" denotes returning to a place He once left!] to Mount Zion [where His feet will touch-Zec 14:4], and I will live [and reign-Jer 3:17, and many other verses] in Jerusalem. Then Jerusalem will be called the Faithful City; the mountain of the LORD of Heaven's Armies will be called the Holy Mountain.
Zec 8:4 "This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies says: Once again old men and women will walk Jerusalem's streets with their canes and will sit together in the city squares.
Zec 8:5 And the streets of the city will be filled with boys and girls at play. (NLT)​

Thus rendering these and the many other related verses as literal. Utilizing the law of non-contradiction, find me a contradictory scripture that specifically states Jesus could and would never dwell and rule on earth? There just are any. He lived and dwelled with us literally once, thus it would not be impossible, absurd, or contradictory for him to do it again! This doesn't fit into WT's doctrine, so they symbolize the literal passages away.

Incredible fore thought went into the bible.... not the sort of fore thought that any man is capable of.

5. I think of it this way. Since applying symbolism to scripture is subject to our incredibly vast and diverse imaginations, I do not see how Christ can condemn anyone for sincerely attempting to interpret His Word literally. Furthermore, even in if your "dime a dozen" figurative interpretation is correct, I would have one heck of a good excuse to claim my ignorance. On the other hand, those who apply symbolism to plain, literal scriptures will have some explaining to do when Christ asks them, "Why did you not just simply read and believe what was written, that one day I will return to Jerusalem. My two feet will stand on the Mount of Olives (Zec 14:4) to rule and dwell from there (Jer3:17; Zec 8:3), and having the children play in its streets (Zec 8:5)?

 

[JFish123]

Rutherford's Great Scam
In 1929, during the Great Depression, the president of the Jehovah's Witnesses, Joseph F. Rutherford, built himself a beautiful villa in San Diego which he used as his winter palace.

While most people were suffering greatly from the economic devastation of the Depression, Rutherford lived like royalty. He drank imported liquor, smoked big cigars, and drove a Cadillac.
Rutherford conned his Witness followers into believing that he had built the house for the soon returning patriarchs, judges, and kings named in Hebrews 11. He named the mansion "Beth Sarim," which in Hebrew means the House of Princes. In an interview with Time magazine in March of 1930, Rutherford said, "I have purposely landscaped the place with palm and olive trees so that these princes of the universe will feel at home."
At the time he built the house, Rutherford was predicting that any moment God would kill every man, woman and child on planet earth except faithful Jehovah's Witnesses. The biblical heroes of Hebrews 11 would then return to earth, and under the leadership of King David, they would use Beth Sarim as their headquarters to rule the world.
Most Jehovah's Witnesses today know nothing about this scam. The property was quietly sold in 1948, and the teaching that David and the patriarchs would soon return was dropped in 1950. Since that time, the Watchtower leaders have gone to great lengths to cover up this hoax.
In the deed it specifies that Joseph F. Rutherford is entitled to use the property as he sees fit until "the appearing of David or some of the other men mentioned in the Eleventh Chapter of Hebrews..." The deed goes on to specify that when King David appears, he must "prove or identify" himself to the officers of the Watchtower Society before he can take possession of the property!

 

[Pegg]

1. The inspired men who authored the scriptures have nothing to do with the manner in which it is interpreted.

No of course not...they are dead!
Its the holy spirit which inspired the bible and its the holy spirit that interprets it.
But often people jump ahead of the holy spirit in an attempt to explain it...we've been guilty of that in the past and so has the rest of christendom.

We must establish doctrine based on what we read in scripture, not establish scripture based on our doctrine. Unfortunately, the WT has done the latter with the doctrine of the kingdom of God.

The other problem is not taking all scripture into account. Jesus said he is comjng with the clouds of heaven. He also said 'the world will behold me no more"
The prophet Daniel foretold a heavenly kingdom as does the book of revelation... the apostles said they would be changed into glorious heavenly bodys and be reunited with christ in heaven.

on all accounts the prophecies regarding the messianic kingdom refer to a heavnly kingdom taking over the rulership of the earth. The WT is completely in line with scripture on this and its the explanation that makes any sense.

2. We must also be mindful of context. Since we believe the book of revelation is written about events occurring at a much later time, we should not dismiss the idea, that at times, John may have been struggling to describe "real" modern day objects utilizing first century semantics.

You think John was struggling to describe real modern day objects???

wasnt he being inspired to write? Yes... so what you are saying is the holy spirit was struggling to describe things.

Not a chance. Jehovah had him write exactly what he was supposed to write.

5. I think of it this way. Since applying symbolism to scripture is subject to our incredibly vast and diverse imaginations, I do not see how Christ can condemn anyone for

It should not be up to our imaginations to describe... its up to the holy spirit to explain. When we try to use our imaginations we make mistakes as the WT has done in the past. Heaven holds no physical beings so its certainly not going to look like a star wars convention. The bible says spirits dont have any form.... so they certainly dont look like us or any other creature on the earth.

 

[e.r.m.]

Is the Watchtower Christian?

The answer to the question is, "No. It is not Christian." Like all non-Christian cults, the Jehovah's Witness' organization distorts the essential doctrines of Christianity. It denies the deity of Christ, His physical resurrection, and salvation by grace. These make it non-Christian. In addition, to support its erring doctrines, the Watchtower organization (which is the author and teacher of all official Jehovah's Witness' theology) has altered the Bible to make it agree with its changing and non-Christian teachings.

Typical with cults that use the Bible to support its position is a host of interpretive errors:

Taking verses out of their immediate context.
Refusing to read verses in the entire Biblical context.
Inserting their theological presuppositions into the text.
Altering the Biblical text to suit their needs.
Latching onto one verse to interpret a host of others.
Changing the meanings of words.
Proclaiming some passages to be figurative when they contradict their doctrines.
Adding to the Word of God.
Additionally, the Jehovah's Witness' organization requires of its members regular weekly attendance at their "Bible Study" meetings where they are repeatedly indoctrinated with anti-Christian teachings. This is done by reading the Watchtower magazine, following along with what it says, reading the questions it asks, and reciting the answers it gives. In other words, the Watchtower Organization carefully trains its members to let the Organization do their thinking for them. For confirmation of this, please read Does the Watchtower organization control the JW's thinking?

The Witnesses are told they will be persecuted when they go door-to-door teaching their doctrines. They are further told that this is simply the enemy fighting against God's organization because they are in "the truth." So, when someone disagrees with them, they are conditioned to reflect on what the Watchtower has told them. They then feel confirmed in being in God's true organization on earth (like all cults claim). They are strongly encouraged to have friends and acquaintances that are only JW's, thereby keeping outside examination to a minimum. They are told to shun those who leave their group, for in this way there is no way to see why someone has left and no way to find out that they are in error from those who have found the truth in Christ. They are conditioned to shy away from any real Biblically knowledgeable person. An example of this is frequently found on the Internet. I was once banned from a Jehovah's Witness' chat room after I not only answered their objections to the Trinity and deity of Christ but also challenged them in return. Subsequently, my name was passed around to all other Jehovah's Witness' rooms where I was banned from them as well. This is a frequent occurrence on the Internet where the Jehovah's Witnesses are alive and well. It is obvious that critical examination of their doctrines is not encouraged by the Watchtower Organization.

The Jehovah's Witnesses consider themselves to be Christians because they believe they are serving the true and living God. Like many cults, they think they are the only true church on earth. Yet, they deny the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the personhood of the Holy Spirit, Jesus' physical resurrection, and salvation by grace through faith.

The Jehovah's Witnesses are discouraged from looking into Jehovah's Witness' history or old Watchtower literature which is replete with contradictions, altered doctrines, and false prophecies. Instead, they are indoctrinated repeatedly against basic Christian doctrines (Trinity, deity of Christ, etc.,) and into the notion that they alone are the true servants of God and that all others are either in "Christendom" or simply unbelievers.

Primarily, the Jehovah's Witness' organization is a mind-control organization that uses its people to pass out literature and send in "donations" to the headquarters in Brooklyn, New York.

"Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian congregation as an organization and not to individuals, regardless of how sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible."1

The Watchtower organization of the Jehovah's Witnesses is a non-Christian organization that uses its people to promulgate false doctrines, collects "contributions" for distribution of a multitudinous amount of literature, and expands its grip into the lives of its members and their families.
It is a non Christian cult.
By CARM.org

Jehovah Witnesses are not a cult. They just just have wildly errant doctrines. That does not make it a cult. Their members are free to choose to buy into that belief system or to leave the church. They don't starve people into submission (as far as I know), they don't restrict a person's movements, and they don't isolate them from their families. To call them a cult is slanderous.

 

[james2ko]

No of course not...they are dead! Its the holy spirit which inspired the bible and its the holy spirit that interprets it. But often people jump ahead of the holy spirit in an attempt to explain it...we've been guilty of that in the past and so has the rest of christendom.

1. That's correct. As long as we are in this flesh, we will all continue to occasionally jump ahead of the hs. Which, in that regard, makes your organization no different than any other in Christendom.

You think John was struggling to describe real modern day objects??? wasnt he being inspired to write? Yes... so what you are saying is the holy spirit was struggling to describe things. Not a chance. Jehovah had him write exactly what he was supposed to write.

2. Then it stands to reason Jehovah had Zecariah, Isaiah, Micah and others write exactly what they were suppose to write about the literal KOG, yet your organization "imagines" something different.

It should not be up to our imaginations to describe... its up to the holy spirit to explain. When we try to use our imaginations we make mistakes as the WT has done in the past. The bible says spirits dont have any form.... so they certainly dont look like us or any other creature on the earth.

3. The book of Hebrews states angels are spirits (Heb 1:14) . But if you ever get a chance to ask Lot and his family, they will tell you they can also take the form of and feel like a real human (Gen 19:14-16). If I am not mistaken, that angels can take the form of humans is your belief, yet you are taking the other side of that argument.That is usually a sign of desperation. Can't you see how the WT has twisted your logic?

Heaven holds no physical beings so its certainly not going to look like a star wars convention.

4. Never said they were physical. I said they were "real". Meaning they exist and look exactly as described in scripture.

The other problem is not taking all scripture into account. Jesus said he is comjng with the clouds of heaven. He also said 'the world will behold me no more"Theprophet Daniel foretold a heavenly kingdom as does the book of revelation... the apostles said they would be changed into glorious heavenly bodys and be reunited with christ in heaven. on all accounts the prophecies regarding the messianic kingdom refer to a heavnly kingdom taking over the rulership of the earth. The WT is completely in line with scripture on this and its the explanation that makes any sense.

5. How quickly we forget. This was dispelled once before. Which would make the rest of your argument moot. It also renders your claim about the The WT being in line with scripture and having the only explanation that makes sense so untrue. You asked:

John 14:19"The world will behold me no more..."
Revelation 1:7"every eye will see him..."

Can you offer an explanation between these two statements so they dont contradict one another?

I replied:

These passages are complementary. In Rev 1:7, the term "see" is in the future tense. In Joh 14:19, both instances of "see" are in the present, indicating Jesus was referring to those of the world living 2,000 + years ago and continuing up until His return in Rev 1:7, who will not physically see Him anymore. But His disciples will continue to "see/perceive" Him spiritually/mentally. At His return, both the world and His disciples will physically yet supernaturally "see" (Heb 9:28) Him descending (1 Th 4:16) from the clouds.

Heb 9:28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear [optomai]a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.

1Th 4:16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.

Rev_1:7 Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see [optomai] Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.​

The English term "optometry" is derived from the Greek term "optomai". And before you bring it up, your organization's interpretation of 1 Tim 6:15-16 was also thoroughly refuted in the same thread:

Return of Christ | Page 4 | ReligiousForums.com

After which you wisely bowed out. The WT has some doctrines correct, but as the evidence plainly demonstrates, they err in the doctrine of the KOG.

You never answered my question in point 4. Here it is again: Utilizing the law of non-contradiction, find me two scriptures that contradict Jesus could and would never dwell and rule on earth in the future?

 

[psychoslice]

Jehovah Witnesses are not a cult. They just just have wildly errant doctrines. That does not make it a cult. Their members are free to choose to buy into that belief system or to leave the church. They don't starve people into submission (as far as I know), they don't restrict a person's movements, and they don't isolate them from their families. To call them a cult is slanderous.

Actually its the opposite, they do all that to their members.

 

[Mountain_Climber]

1. The inspired men who authored the scriptures have nothing to do with the manner in which it is interpreted. Symbolism and metaphor certainly have there place in scripture, but much too often, we get carried away and lose out on the simple literal meaning God intended all along. We must establish doctrine based on what we read in scripture, not establish scripture based on our doctrine. Unfortunately, the WT has done the latter with the doctrine of the kingdom of God.



2. We must also be mindful of context. Since we believe the book of revelation is written about events occurring at a much later time, we should not dismiss the idea, that at times, John may have been struggling to describe "real" modern day objects utilizing first century semantics.



3. You are rendering two different realms as equal. Our reality is not God's reality (Isa 58:8-9). Just because it sounds alien to us, is it to God? Of course not. Are the living creatures around God's throne "literal" or "symbolic" to God? Their foreign appearance (foreign to us) may have some figurative connotation, but they are "real" creatures. It would not be far-fetched for the creatures and objects in Ezekiel's vision to also be "real" and normal to God and the heavenly hosts. This is why I believe all of our animals were patterned after some of them. Based on some of the descriptions in scripture, from our perspective, heaven would look like a Star Wars bar scene.



4. These are obvious similes . We should interpret literally unless the sense implies an impossibility, a contradiction, or absurdity. Multi-headed creatures coming out of our oceans wearing crowns was an absurdity/impossibility in the first century, signaling a symbolic inference. In one case, we know it was symbolic because an explanation was provided for the monstrous symbols (Rev 17). Men and women walking down the street and sitting together in a city square, while children play is neither absurd or impossible:

Zec 8:3 "And now the LORD says: I am returning [the Hebrew term "shoob" denotes returning to a place He once left!] to Mount Zion [where His feet will touch-Zec 14:4], and I will live [and reign-Jer 3:17, and many other verses] in Jerusalem. Then Jerusalem will be called the Faithful City; the mountain of the LORD of Heaven's Armies will be called the Holy Mountain.
Zec 8:4 "This is what the LORD of Heaven's Armies says: Once again old men and women will walk Jerusalem's streets with their canes and will sit together in the city squares.
Zec 8:5 And the streets of the city will be filled with boys and girls at play. (NLT)​

Thus rendering these and the many other related verses as literal. Utilizing the law of non-contradiction, find me a contradictory scripture that specifically states Jesus could and would never dwell and rule on earth? There just are any. He lived and dwelled with us literally once, thus it would not be impossible, absurd, or contradictory for him to do it again! This doesn't fit into WT's doctrine, so they symbolize the literal passages away.



5. I think of it this way. Since applying symbolism to scripture is subject to our incredibly vast and diverse imaginations, I do not see how Christ can condemn anyone for sincerely attempting to interpret His Word literally. Furthermore, even in if your "dime a dozen" figurative interpretation is correct, I would have one heck of a good excuse to claim my ignorance. On the other hand, those who apply symbolism to plain, literal scriptures will have some explaining to do when Christ asks them, "Why did you not just simply read and believe what was written, that one day I will return to Jerusalem. My two feet will stand on the Mount of Olives (Zec 14:4) to rule and dwell from there (Jer3:17; Zec 8:3), and having the children play in its streets (Zec 8:5)?

I like the fact that you do give real thought to what you speak.

I have another (or, maybe not) idea about this from the standpoint of Jerusalem being considered a woman. Thus this returning may not need carry a literal sense as to that geographical location. That woman and her children were spread throughout the entire earth.

Of course, as with any premise, one must be patient to see that it holds true throughout scripture.