JW's Preach A Different Gospel

[djhwoodwerks]

@jdhwoodwerks
Please pull in the horns and tell the whole story.
History of Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Watch Tower literature did not state dogmatically that 1975 would definitely mark the end,[195] and the buildup was tempered with cautions that there was no certainty that Armageddon would arrive in 1975, but magazines warned that "time is running out rapidly"[196] and that "only a few years, at most" remained before Armageddon.[197] Circuit assemblies in 1970 held a public talk entitled "Who will conquer the world in the 1970s?"[198] and in a speech in Australia in 1975 the society's vice-president Frederick Franz went so far as to name a precise date—September 5, 1975—as the "end of the present wicked system".[199] Witnesses were also urged that they should not be "toying with the words of Jesus that 'concerning that day and hour nobody knows' ... to the contrary, one should be keenly aware that the end of this system of things is rapidly coming to its violent end."[200] The number of baptisms soared from about 59,000 in 1966, to more than 297,000 in 1974, but membership declined after expectations for the year failed.[192][201] In 1976 The Watchtower advised those who had been "disappointed" by the failure of the predictions for 1975 to adjust their viewpoint because their understanding had been "based on wrong premises",[202] but four years later, after several proposals by Governing Body members to apologize to Witnesses were voted down,[203] the Watch Tower Society admitted its responsibility in building up hope regarding 1975.[204]


Do you really think ANY human organization in 100% right 100% of the time?
One wonders how many denominations have never, ever, changed dogma?
Wonder how many times just the Catholic Church has changed dogma???????

History of Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From 1966, Witness publications heightened anticipation of Christ's thousand-year millennial reign beginning in late 1975.[184][185][186][187] Repeating the 1925 cycle of excitement, anticipation and then disappointment, Witness publications and convention talks intensified focus on 1975 as the "appropriate" time for God to act,[188] with statements that "the immediate future is certain to be filled with climactic events ... within a few years at most the final parts of the Bible prophecy relative to these 'last days' will undergo fulfillment".[189] The September 15, 1971 issue of The Watchtower warned that "all worldly careers are soon to come to an end", and advised youths that they should not "get interested in ‘higher education’ for a future that will never eventuate."[190] A chart in a 1971 Awake! indicated the "thrilling hope" of a "grand Sabbath of rest and relief" in the mid-1970s at the close of 6000 years of human history.[191] Some Witnesses sold businesses and homes, gave up jobs, deferred medical procedures and set aside plans to start a family in anticipation of Armageddon's arrival.[192][193] The May 1974 issue of the Watch Tower Society's newsletter, Our Kingdom Ministry, commended Witnesses who had sold homes and property to devote themselves to preaching in the "short time" remaining.[194]


Right back at you! Here's is proof that people pick and choose what message they want to convey! The paragraph I attached is the one right before the one you attached. You had to read this one before you read the one you posted. If you're going to try and defend something, do it right!!

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Let's not pretend we don't know what this mans true intensions are.It's obvious.

Praise God! You and God are the only ones that can see in a mans heart and have the authority to judge!!

 

[djhwoodwerks]

bh p. 218 par. 4 Who Is Michael the Archangel? *** (What Does The Bible Really Teach)
Archangel. God’s Word refers to Michael “the archangel.” (Jude 9) This term means “chief angel.” Notice that Michael is called the archangel. This suggests that there is only one such angel. In fact, the term “archangel” occurs in the Bible only in the "singular", never in the plural. Moreover, Jesus is linked with the office of archangel. Regarding the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Thessalonians 4:16 states: “The Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice.” Thus the voice of Jesus is described as being that of an archangel. This scripture therefore suggests that Jesus himself is the archangel Michael. (emphasis mine)

Will a JW please explain to me how, in the above article does "SINGULAR" actually mean "ONE" Archangel but in the article below, "SINGULAR" indicates a composite slave?

And consider this, it says Jesus will come "with" an Archangels voice, does that mean He will have the voice of an Archangel or will He come with the voice of an Archangel? A judge enters the courtroom with the voice of a bailiff. A football player enters the field with the voice of an announcer. If Michael yells, calls or whatever he will do, Jesus is still coming with the voice of an Archangel.


*** w13 7/15 p. 22 par. 10 “Who Really Is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?” ***
10 Who, then, is the faithful and discreet slave? In keeping with Jesus’ pattern of feeding many through the hands of a few, that slave is made up of a small group of anointed brothers who are directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food during Christ’s presence. Throughout the last days, the anointed brothers who make up the faithful slave have served together at headquarters. In recent decades, that slave has been closely identified with the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Note, however, that the word “slave” in Jesus’ illustration is "singular", indicating that this is a composite slave. The decisions of the Governing Body are thus made collectively.

 

[Wharton]

Really? Who is Jack?
"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)

This ^^^^^^ with reference to the claims that J.W.'s are the only religious organization
that claims they are the only salvation. The Catholic church has espoused this claim
for centuries. (JACK)

Catholicism's Ever-Changing Doctrine

FOUR decades ago, Roman Catholics were hit over the head by revisions of church teaching and practice authorized by the world's bishops at the Second Vatican Council. If the language of the Mass, prohibition of meat on Friday and, most striking, the church's unrelenting contrast between its truths and the errors of every other religion could be altered, what couldn't be? Doctrine on contraception? Divorce and remarriage? Capital punishment? Same-sex relationships? Ordination of women?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/22/books/review/a-church-that-can-and-cannot-change-dogma.html?_r=0

Really? Catholic doctrine cannot change?
There's TONS of information about changes in Catholic doctrine.
Who are you trying to kid?
I was born at night but not LAST night.

My favorite claim is the one the Pope made about Hell.
He said it was a cutting off from God without hope. NOT hell fire and torment.
Look that one up Jack.

Why didn't you bother to print the entire statement?

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance.

The statement you printed was back in the 300's. There was no other Church. There was no other faith. There were no other Christian denominations to consider. Today there are. Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Christians hold that faith, except JW's.

The Mass in Latin, eating meat on Friday, priestly celibacy, the fasting time before receiving communion, etc., are Church disciplines, not doctrine or dogma.

The pope's opinion on hell are just that, opinions. It's not doctrine or dogma.

So let's see your "TONS of information about changes in Catholic doctrine."

 

[JFish123]

Jesus is called the unique Son of God where Michael is called "One of the Chief Princes." Meaning Michael is NOT unique as He's one of a number of Chief Princes or Arc Angels. So Jesus can't be Michael

 

[Wharton]

Why didn't you show the entire monument? Because you didn't want readers to know
the man died in 1916?
You somehow doubt much has been learned since then?

All I know is that your founder was buried under a pagan pyramid with what JW's today hold to be a pagan cross on it. Does that make CT Russell a pagan? He based all of his end time calculations on the lengths of passages in the Giza pyramid. What's that all about?

 

[Wharton]

Jesus is called the unique Son of God where Michael is called "One of the Chief Princes." Meaning Michael is NOT unique as He's one of a number of Chief Princes or Arc Angels. So Jesus can't be Michael

JW Jesus is a Transformer. Michael to Jesus to Michael. Seems Jehovah has a problem with who his son really is?

 

[JFish123]

All I know is that your founder was buried under a pagan pyramid with what JW's today hold to be a pagan cross on it. Does that make CT Russell a pagan? He based all of his end time calculations on the lengths of passages in the Giza pyramid. What's that all about?

If Russell was alive today, he'd be disfellowshipped for his views. Think about that. The founder of a religion, would be shunned by the religion just 100 years later.

 

[oldbadger]

Mat 23:25-26 (ESVST) 25 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self- indulgence. 26 You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and the plate, that the outside also may be clean. 27 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people's bones and all uncleanness. 28 So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.

John the Baptist felt much the same, about all the priesthood and upper classes. These people had mostly forsaken the true Jewish ways, were cosying up to their invaders and had been copying many their Roman and Greek fashions, rules and laws for a long time. The peasant classes were suffering in hardship and over-taxation and the priesthood were 'living it up', a bunch of hellenised, hypocritical quislings.
Galileans were mostly the ones who spoke out against and acted against these people. Jesus son of Man and Jesus son of the Father were two typical examples of revolutionaries and insurrectionists who demonstrated, picketed and even rioted against the priesthood. There were many in those times.

 

[oldbadger]

Do you think Paul spoke on his own? If you don't know your Bible, why are you here making comments? The Apostles never spoke on their own authority, but spoke what they were given to speak. So, when Paul is quoted, Jesus is quoted................

All your quotes seem (to me) to be misinterpreted. You never quote Jesus so you seem to use spin to get around that.

You seem to use your faith like a hammer, rather than a gift of love.
You seem to spit your creed upon those who disagree with you.
A Jevovah's Witness could never chuck their scripture at people.
IMO The quality of your faith shows itself in the way that you hurl it at me.

 

[oldbadger]

Best you read about their early beginnings.

Jesus really said it.............:-
Why behold the mote in thy brother's eye, but consider not the beam in thy own?
Mat 7:3

 

[oldbadger]

Well Jesus had respect for Him by showing him His resurrected body and directing him throughout His life by the Holy Spirit.

.............. and so you believe that all of Paul's rulings, laws, ideas and tenrets come direct from Jesus?....... even though Jesus did not mention them?
So Paul is the centre of your faith?
If you quote Jesus it might be better.

 

[oldbadger]

Jesus, the apostles, nor Paul went door to door.

You think that the people had doors? The vast majority of peasants lived in tents. That's why, for example, there's not much building archaeology from this time found at Nazareth.

They preached in the synagogue, on the streets, and from house church to house church. Never door to door.

If you follow the story of Jesus's mission then you will get it right.
Now:-
(From memory)
Mark 6. And he called the twelve and sent them forth two by two................
....and he said, whenever you enter into a house..........

Of course, house is the closest translation to 'home', I guess.

 

[JFish123]

You think that the people had doors? The vast majority of peasants lived in tents. That's why, for example, there's not much building archaeology from this time found at Nazareth.


If you follow the story of Jesus's mission then you will get it right.
Now:-
(From memory)
Mark 6. And he called the twelve and sent them forth two by two................
....and he said, whenever you enter into a house..........

Of course, house is the closest translation to 'home', I guess.

11 Whatever town or village you enter, search there for some worthy person and stay at their house until you leave.
Matthew 10:11
Yes, find ONE HOUSE. Then just stay at the one house, then preach to the town, not going house to house or tent to tent. That's Jesus' example. Which is not the JW's. They put things in their Bible and theology that aren't there.

 

[JFish123]

John the Baptist felt much the same, about all the priesthood and upper classes. These people had mostly forsaken the true Jewish ways, were cosying up to their invaders and had been copying many their Roman and Greek fashions, rules and laws for a long time. The peasant classes were suffering in hardship and over-taxation and the priesthood were 'living it up', a bunch of hellenised, hypocritical quislings.
Galileans were mostly the ones who spoke out against and acted against these people. Jesus son of Man and Jesus son of the Father were two typical examples of revolutionaries and insurrectionists who demonstrated, picketed and even rioted against the priesthood. There were many in those times.

Many but when those revolutionaries, those messiahs were killed, there followers disappeared. So why not Jesus'? Because he was raised from the dead. Because He was God.

 

[Wharton]

Jesus really said it.............:-
Why behold the mote in thy brother's eye, but consider not the beam in thy own?
Mat 7:3

“I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge” (Rom. 10:2, NIV).

 

[oldbadger]

11 Whatever town or village you enter, search there for some worthy person and stay at their house until you leave.
Matthew 10:11
Yes, find ONE HOUSE. Then just stay at the one house, then preach to the town, not going house to house or tent to tent. That's Jesus' example. Which is not the JW's. They put things in their Bible and theology that aren't there.

You're mis-interpreting, I think.
Those couples called at many homes to find a worthy person....

 

[oldbadger]

Many but when those revolutionaries, those messiahs were killed, there followers disappeared. So why not Jesus'? Because he was raised from the dead. Because He was God.

Thankyou for your reply.

 

[oldbadger]

“I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge” (Rom. 10:2, NIV).

I quoted Jesus.
You quoted Paul.
Whose words hold more value for you?

 

[JFish123]

You're mis-interpreting, I think.
Those couples called at many homes to find a worthy person....

Yes, to find the first worthy person they came across so they could stay at that one house. Then they stopped, as they found a place to stay for a few days. Then they preached to everyone in town. Not going door to door, otherwise they would've continued house to house, AFTER they found a house to stay in. But they didn't.