The Jehovah's witnesses and the rest. What's the stumper?

[oldbadger]

oldbadger thank you for your reply: First you are mixed up... "that believers (in Jesus) are good, but that those who question or need proof are 'Not Good'!
Scriptures say "Those who do right are good!" Believing Jesus is believing his words! Those who refuse to do good trusting only in faith (Faith Alone) are not going to enter heaven they are children of Satan!
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

oldbadger you quote scriptures..... (above) I reply First You must take them scriptures in context to the whole book! Believing in Jesus MUST include believing his words....
John 12:48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day.

Those who have placed their salvation in the man made tradition of saved by Faith ALONE must reject the words of Jesus to trust the words of Martin Luther!


Luke 10:16 “Whoever listens to you listens to me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Hello Dogknox20....
Me? ..... Mixed up? In many ways, yes.
But there's a problem ....... you see, although the Gospel of John is full of very useful pieces of information that John must have collected somehow, it seems obvious to me that Apostle John never was the disciple, was never a witness to any of the things that he writes about. I can see this because he gets everything MIXED UP!
He thought that Jesus made that fuss in the Great Temple in the first week of his mission rather than in the last, and he gets every day wrong in his description of the last week.
He caused two millenia of Antisemitism with his lies about what THE JEWS did (it was the priesthood) and his claims that all those who question the Faith are 'children of Satan' opened the doorways to the disgusting acts of some Christians against so many innocent people.

I do believe about Jesus, Dogknox20, that he existed and had a mission, and I do use much info from G-John as useful, but Idon't trust Apostle John's word for a moment. He fibbed far too much about what he did and where he was.
I'm sorry about that.

 

[Deeje]

He thought that Jesus made that fuss in the Great Temple in the first week of his mission rather than in the last, and he gets every day wrong in his description of the last week.

Just wondering OB...is it possible that Jesus' drove out the money changers on two separate occasions?....once at the beginning of his ministry and also once near the conclusion? Were the Jews known for doing as Gods prophets had told in those days? What was their history?

Their greed for money was well known and it was for this reason that so many perished in the second attack on Jerusalem by the Romans. Four years had passed since the Romans under Cestius Gallus had inexplicably withdrawn from their first assault on Jerusalem, and many had just resumed their businesses when Jesus had warned that when they saw the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem, they were to flee to the mountains.There was a window of opportunity and the faithful fled as Jesus recommended.

Those who fled were saved, but any who returned, thinking that it was now safe to do so, perished in that dreadful second attack which saw their temple and their city in ruins. The loss of life was horrendous. Was that disgusting act God's fault? Was that loss of life for so many Jews, God's doing? Why do you think that he did not come to their rescue? Why had he allowed his Temple to be destroyed in the past? This time it was never rebuilt.....

He caused two millenia of Antisemitism with his lies about what THE JEWS did (it was the priesthood) and his claims that all those who question the Faith are 'children of Satan' opened the doorways to the disgusting acts of some Christians against so many innocent people.

It was not just the priesthood though....it was also the people who clamored for his death.
Matthew 27:20-26
"But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowds to ask for Bar·abʹbas, but to have Jesus put to death. 21 In response the governor said to them: “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” They said: “Bar·abʹbas.” 22 Pilate said to them: “What, then, should I do with Jesus the so-called Christ?” They all said: “To the stake with him!” 23 He said: “Why? What bad thing did he do?” Still they kept shouting out all the more: “To the stake with him!”

24 Seeing that it did no good but, rather, an uproar was arising, Pilate took water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying: “I am innocent of the blood of this man. You yourselves must see to it.” 25 At that all the people said in answer: “Let his blood come upon us and upon our children.” 26 Then he released Bar·abʹbas to them, but he had Jesus whipped and handed him over to be executed on the stake."

The crowds were persuaded by the chief priests and the elders, but their lust for his blood grew into a frenzy when Pilate suggested that they choose the less guilty man to be released....but NO! they insisted that a common criminal be released instead.

It is interesting to note that the Jews actually cursed themselves with Jesus' blood. So what came upon the Jews was actually their own doing....you don't make an oath like that and expect God to just cop it on the chin....he had been doing that all through Israel's history....this was the last straw....it was enough now. In Matthew 23:37-39, Jesus had already sealed their fate.

In the centuries where "the disgusting acts of some Christians against so many" innocent Jewish people, those acts of anti-Semitism were not enacted by true Christians at all, but by the "weeds" of Jesus parable.

Jesus' command was to "love your enemies"....which precluded any acts of violence against anyone. The good Samaritan was the story Jesus told....but the Jews were not the heroes of the tale...it was the hated Samaritan who took care of the injured Jew. Hatred was never to move a Christian to acts of violence. Any who did resort to it were proclaiming to the world that they were NOT Christ's disciples. You are blaming the wrong people IMO.

Idon't trust Apostle John's word for a moment. He fibbed far too much about what he did and where he was.

I really believe that you are doing John a grave injustice OB. Jesus did after all entrust the care of his widowed mother to this apostle. Not something he would have done to one he did not trust. God and his son hate liars, so that proves to me that John never lied.

Just my two cents worth OB....

 

[firedragon]

Just wondering OB...is it possible that Jesus' drove out the money changers on two separate occasions?....once at the beginning of his ministry and also once near the conclusion? Were the Jews known for doing as Gods prophets had told in those days? What was their history?

Their greed for money was well known and it was for this reason that so many perished in the second attack on Jerusalem by the Romans. Four years had passed since the Romans under Cestius Gallus had inexplicably withdrawn from their first assault on Jerusalem, and many had just resumed their businesses when Jesus had warned that when they saw the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem, they were to flee to the mountains.There was a window of opportunity and the faithful fled as Jesus recommended.

Those who fled were saved, but any who returned, thinking that it was now safe to do so, perished in that dreadful second attack which saw their temple and their city in ruins. The loss of life was horrendous. Was that disgusting act God's fault? Was that loss of life for so many Jews, God's doing? Why do you think that he did not come to their rescue? Why had he allowed his Temple to be destroyed in the past? This time it was never rebuilt.....



It was not just the priesthood though....it was also the people who clamored for his death.
Matthew 27:20-26
"But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowds to ask for Bar·abʹbas, but to have Jesus put to death. 21 In response the governor said to them: “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” They said: “Bar·abʹbas.” 22 Pilate said to them: “What, then, should I do with Jesus the so-called Christ?” They all said: “To the stake with him!” 23 He said: “Why? What bad thing did he do?” Still they kept shouting out all the more: “To the stake with him!”

24 Seeing that it did no good but, rather, an uproar was arising, Pilate took water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying: “I am innocent of the blood of this man. You yourselves must see to it.” 25 At that all the people said in answer: “Let his blood come upon us and upon our children.” 26 Then he released Bar·abʹbas to them, but he had Jesus whipped and handed him over to be executed on the stake."

The crowds were persuaded by the chief priests and the elders, but their lust for his blood grew into a frenzy when Pilate suggested that they choose the less guilty man to be released....but NO! they insisted that a common criminal be released instead.

It is interesting to note that the Jews actually cursed themselves with Jesus' blood. So what came upon the Jews was actually their own doing....you don't make an oath like that and expect God to just cop it on the chin....he had been doing that all through Israel's history....this was the last straw....it was enough now. In Matthew 23:37-39, Jesus had already sealed their fate.

In the centuries where "the disgusting acts of some Christians against so many" innocent Jewish people, those acts of anti-Semitism were not enacted by true Christians at all, but by the "weeds" of Jesus parable.

Jesus' command was to "love your enemies"....which precluded any acts of violence against anyone. The good Samaritan was the story Jesus told....but the Jews were not the heroes of the tale...it was the hated Samaritan who took care of the injured Jew. Hatred was never to move a Christian to acts of violence. Any who did resort to it were proclaiming to the world that they were NOT Christ's disciples. You are blaming the wrong people IMO.



I really believe that you are doing John a grave injustice OB. Jesus did after all entrust the care of his widowed mother to this apostle. Not something he would have done to one he did not trust. God and his son hate liars, so that proves to me that John never lied.

Just my two cents worth OB....

Hi Deeje. I know that the thread has kind of run its course. But I need to ask you some thing.

What is the one main question that the Trinitarian Christianity adhering to the orthodox athanasian creed cannot answer, yet JW's can in terms of God/theology/salvation?

Whats the stumper?

 

[oldbadger]

Just wondering OB...is it possible that Jesus' drove out the money changers on two separate occasions?....once at the beginning of his ministry and also once near the conclusion?

Hi.....
No. I don't think that anybody who did anything like that would get away with it once, let alone twice. There were six thousand Levite Guards and two thousand priests present at the main feasts, so I really do doubt that. But that's just my opinion.

Were the Jews known for doing as Gods prophets had told in those days? What was their history?

No. 'The Jews' were not known....... only Apostle John accused 'The Jews' of their plots, their interrogations, their wish to kill Jesus..... the other gospels show that it was 'The Priesthood' who were greedy, hypocritical, plotting, cunning and hellinist. The Baptist got that dead right as well, despite what Luke (not a witness) said.
The Jews were mostly poor working class people, the 5 peasant classes (there was no middle class) and they were for ever fleeced of their savings at every possible chance, which is almost certainly why the Baptist and Jesus were offering cleansing, redemption and mercy for nothing (which must have upset the Temple money-go-round somewhat. But that's just my opinion.

Their greed for money was well known and it was for this reason that so many perished in the second attack on Jerusalem by the Romans. Four years had passed since the Romans under Cestius Gallus had inexplicably withdrawn from their first assault on Jerusalem, and many had just resumed their businesses when Jesus had warned that when they saw the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem, they were to flee to the mountains.There was a window of opportunity and the faithful fled as Jesus recommended.

THat's all after the events of Jesus's time and mission. The Jewish people did eventually rise up but that was against the invaders, their rubbish leaders.... the whole thing.

Those who fled were saved, but any who returned, thinking that it was now safe to do so, perished in that dreadful second attack which saw their temple and their city in ruins. The loss of life was horrendous. Was that disgusting act God's fault? Was that loss of life for so many Jews, God's doing? Why do you think that he did not come to their rescue? Why had he allowed his Temple to be destroyed in the past? This time it was never rebuilt.....

All after the events of Jesus.

It was not just the priesthood though....it was also the people who clamored for his death.
Matthew 27:20-26
"But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowds to ask for Bar·abʹbas, but to have Jesus put to death. 21 In response the governor said to them: “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” They said: “Bar·abʹbas.” 22 Pilate said to them: “What, then, should I do with Jesus the so-called Christ?” They all said: “To the stake with him!” 23 He said: “Why? What bad thing did he do?” Still they kept shouting out all the more: “To the stake with him!”
24 Seeing that it did no good but, rather, an uproar was arising, Pilate took water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying: “I am innocent of the blood of this man. You yourselves must see to it.” 25 At that all the people said in answer: “Let his blood come upon us and upon our children.” 26 Then he released Bar·abʹbas to them, but he had Jesus whipped and handed him over to be executed on the stake."

Ah! I acknowledge what you belireve in, but I believe in something different to that as explained in the same gospels. A man who led a riot in Jerusalem, most probably through the Temple, possibly in the same group as Jesus, was called 'Jesus Son of the Father'. That Christians removed his first name after earliest editions and kept his name in Eastern Araimic to confuse Roman readers is there for all to see. The people loved this man dearly and demanded his release. Pilate felt compelled to pardon and release him.
THe people appealed for that Jresus...... it's there in the gospels.

The crowds were persuaded by the chief priests and the elders, but their lust for his blood grew into a frenzy when Pilate suggested that they choose the less guilty man to be released....but NO! they insisted that a common criminal be released instead.

That 'common criminal' was called 'Jesus Son of the Father'......... and the people loved him dearly.

It is interesting to note that the Jews actually cursed themselves with Jesus' blood. So what came upon the Jews was actually their own doing....you don't make an oath like that and expect God to just cop it on the chin....he had been doing that all through Israel's history....this was the last straw....it was enough now. In Matthew 23:37-39, Jesus had already sealed their fate.
In the centuries where "the disgusting acts of some Christians against so many" innocent Jewish people, those acts of anti-Semitism were not enacted by true Christians at all, but by the "weeds" of Jesus parable.
Jesus' command was to "love your enemies"....which precluded any acts of violence against anyone. The good Samaritan was the story Jesus told....but the Jews were not the heroes of the tale...it was the hated Samaritan who took care of the injured Jew. Hatred was never to move a Christian to acts of violence. Any who did resort to it were proclaiming to the world that they were NOT Christ's disciples. You are blaming the wrong people IMO.

Buit I don't see it that way.

I really believe that you are doing John a grave injustice OB. Jesus did after all entrust the care of his widowed mother to this apostle. Not something he would have done to one he did not trust. God and his son hate liars, so that proves to me that John never lied.
Just my two cents worth OB....

I know that you do believe, Deeje. I know.
But I don't think Apostle John was there.
He didn't even get the date/day of Jesus's death the same as the Synoptics, those gospels at least written (or copied from) a witness account.

Do you see why I could not be a JW? We just don't believe in the same things.

 

[Dogknox20]

Hello Dogknox20....
Me? ..... Mixed up? In many ways, yes.
But there's a problem ....... you see, although the Gospel of John is full of very useful pieces of information that John must have collected somehow, it seems obvious to me that Apostle John never was the disciple, was never a witness to any of the things that he writes about. I can see this because he gets everything MIXED UP!
He thought that Jesus made that fuss in the Great Temple in the first week of his mission rather than in the last, and he gets every day wrong in his description of the last week.
He caused two millenia of Antisemitism with his lies about what THE JEWS did (it was the priesthood) and his claims that all those who question the Faith are 'children of Satan' opened the doorways to the disgusting acts of some Christians against so many innocent people.

I do believe about Jesus, Dogknox20, that he existed and had a mission, and I do use much info from G-John as useful, but Idon't trust Apostle John's word for a moment. He fibbed far too much about what he did and where he was.
I'm sorry about that.

oldbadger I point out Jesus called people (Pharisees) "Children of Satan!" Baptism saves; John told the Pharisees coming to be saved they are also Children of Satan (Luke 3) I point out The Gospel of John is the inspired word of God as well as the Gospel of Luke.. To say what you say you are telling me God lied!

 

[oldbadger]

oldbadger I point out Jesus called people (Pharisees) "Children of Satan!" Baptism saves; John told the Pharisees coming to be saved they are also Children of Satan (Luke 3)

That's much better! Yes...... Both Jesus and the Baptist called the Priesthood Vipers, which is very very bad....... the lowest. The hiss of the viper which tempted Eve, etc.
But 'The Pharisees' were not the priesthood, Dogknox..... Not all Pharisees were Levites. It's better to read G-Mark for such things imo.

I point out The Gospel of John is the inspired word of God as well as the Gospel of Luke.. To say what you say you are telling me God lied!

No, DogKnox....... I am not telling you God lied. You cannot use such a false equivalence as that.

You believe that the G-John is the inspired word of God, I don't, is all you can say.

G-John did not even get the same date for Jesus's death as the other Gospels, so that doesn't seem accurate to me. There's lot's more that I don't trust about it although many of the accounts within are most useful.

It's better to just have your own Faith without looking at the rest of the World as the Children of Satan, imo.

 

[Dogknox20]

That's much better! Yes...... Both Jesus and the Baptist called the Priesthood Vipers, which is very very bad....... the lowest. The hiss of the viper which tempted Eve, etc.
But 'The Pharisees' were not the priesthood, Dogknox..... Not all Pharisees were Levites. It's better to read G-Mark for such things imo.


No, DogKnox....... I am not telling you God lied. You cannot use such a false equivalence as that.

You believe that the G-John is the inspired word of God, I don't, is all you can say.

G-John did not even get the same date for Jesus's death as the other Gospels, so that doesn't seem accurate to me. There's lot's more that I don't trust about it although many of the accounts within are most useful.

It's better to just have your own Faith without looking at the rest of the World as the Children of Satan, imo.

oldbadger The G of John is in the bible it is inspired or nothing in the scriptures is inspired toss your bible out your stinking window if your refuse to accept the G of John how could you be sure any of the bible is inspired.. ? "You Can't"!
You made a mistake.... John called the Crowds/multitudes "Satan's Children"! Not the priests!
Nothing about priesthood or Pharisees you are reading into it what is not written!
John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?

Jesus calls the Jews the devils children JEWS not the Priesthood the devils children!
John 8:44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

 

[Deeje]

.
What is the one main question that the Trinitarian Christianity adhering to the orthodox athanasian creed cannot answer, yet JW's can in terms of God/theology/salvation?

Whats the stumper?

OK.....this what we would pick out of that creed.....there is not one “stumper” but a plethora of them....

This quoted from Wiki....(a sampling only)

“Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this:”

Straight away there is a red flag......this would be the holding of the “catholic” faith rather than the ”Christian” faith.
By comparison, there is little that the catholic faith has in common with original Christianity, in fact, it is a complete departure. Adoptions of non-Christian concepts rendered their claim to be “Christian” a complete contradiction (2 Corinthians 6:14-18)......not surprising really because this apostasy was foretold by Jesus and the apostles. (Matthew 13:36-43; 2 Peter 2:1-3; 2 Thessalonians 2:3)

“that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal.”

To worship “one God in trinity” is a concept completely absent from scripture. The Jews had no such concept. (Deuteronomy 6:4) Yahweh was one, never three, but non-Abrahamic religions already had trinities of gods. (e.g. Egypt)

Jesus was Jewish and taught from Jewish scripture. There is not even a hint of shared “personhood” or “essence”, since these terms are never applied to Yahweh. If each is God, you do not have three persons, but three gods.....that is polytheism in disguise.

“Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated.”

The Father is definitely uncreated, (the only eternal Being in existence) and his holy spirit, which we believe to be his unlimited power in action, (always directed by him) has always been his possession.....but his “only begotten son” is a created being who existed “with” the Father since the “beginning” of his existence. (John 1:1)

Since the Father was always God, until he created his son, he was not a Father, he is the ‘begetter’ or creator of this personage he calls his son. (Colossians 1:15-17; Revelation 3:14) So, the son is definitely a created being, who was used by the Father in the creation of all things, both in heaven and on earth. Proverbs 8:30-31 explains the “us” and “our” in Genesis 1:26....this “Master Workman” was at his Father’s side throughout the lengthy process of creation.

“So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty.”

The title “Almighty” is applied to Yahweh alone. Jesus is never called “almighty” and neither is the holy spirit because they are not Almighty God, but are closely related to him and the accomplishment of his will and purpose.

There is not one mention of a “holy ghost” in any scripture. The word “ghost” (as understood in English of an invisible entity, usually the spirit of a dead person, who manifests visibly in some way) does not exist in any Bible verse.

“Ghost” is a German Word (geist) but it simply means a spirit.
The Bible says that God is a spirit and so are all who dwell with God in that realm. The only “spirits” (who interacted with humans) in the Bible are either angels or demons. Angels only appeared in materialised form because God’s law forbade communication with spirits. (Deuteronomy 18:9-12.....spiritism was something that was common in Canaanite paganism) This protected God’s people from contact with deceptive spirits (demons) who were out to lead them away from God. These spirits could communicate with humans only through “spirit mediums” whom God banned from the land of Israel. They were never spirits of the dead because there is no such thing. There is no teaching of an immortal soul in the Bible.

“So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God.”

This is three gods. Squeezing three gods into one “head” is not something the Bible ever suggests. Even the Catholic Church admits that the trinity is not found in scripture.

“So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords.”

The Holy Spirit is never called either “God” or “Lord”. Yahweh is addressed by name almost 7,000 times in the Hebrew scriptures and when the Jews began to use a substitute for God’s name (Adonai “Lord”) in their speech (but retaining it in written form) the pronunciation was eventually lost. So in the Christian scriptures there are two “Lords” spoken about, but since Catholic doctrine fused these two together, firstly a duality was formed, (Father and Son) leading to the eventual declaration of a triune god with the inclusion of the holy spirit in a trinity. And this was over 300 years after Christ’s death. How odd that God would hide his true identity from humankind for so long, and that an apostate church should be granted this information that changed the nature of God forever in the minds of those it managed to keep in ignorance for centuries, feeding them this rubbish and masking the true nature of God.

“...Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell; rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved.”

Here we have a familiar part of the creed.....where Christ descended into “hell” which is “hades” in Greek and the equivalent of “sheol” in Hebrew, which never meant a place of conscious torment according to Solomon. (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10) it was a place of complete unconsciousness.....so “Rest in Peace” on gravestones means exactly that.

The son ascended into heaven to “sit at God’s right hand” but there is not one mention of the holy spirit sitting at his left hand.

The judgment that is to come will see Jesus giving these pretenders their just desserts. (Matthew 7:21-23) Just as he condemned the religious leaders in his day, so will he likewise condemn the religious leaders of today who follow what the Catholic Church formulated all those centuries ago, imagining that their “Christianity” is acceptable to the Christ whose teachings they do not follow.

Nuff said.....?

 

[oldbadger]

oldbadger The G of John is in the bible it is inspired or nothing in the scriptures is inspired toss your bible out your stinking window if your refuse to accept the G of John how could you be sure any of the bible is inspired.. ? "You Can't"!

Dogknox20 the above is false equivalence. Each gospel is its own book imo, and whereas G-Mark is a very accurate account imo, G-John clearly shows that the writer was not the disciple, not a witness and written about 100-120 AD. Irenaeus was proud to have met John in the 2nd century.
Dogknox20, my window does not stink, ok?

You made a mistake.... John called the Crowds/multitudes "Satan's Children"! Not the priests!
Nothing about priesthood or Pharisees you are reading into it what is not written!

Yes it is written, but you have focused upon John's words rather than, say, Mark's. If you need me to show you from the bible then just ask.

John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?

And now you're thinking of what Luke wrote rather than Mark. Luke was not a witness and he needed to copy large tracts of Mark word-for-word...... he was not there. And Mark knew that Jesus loved the working Jewish people.

Jesus calls the Jews the devils children JEWS not the Priesthood the devils children!,

I can assure you that Jesus's whole wrath was directed straight at the Priesthood, I can show you verse if you need me to help you with this.
The priesthood was just a greedy bunch of quislings, helping themselves, copying Roman customs and worse. They even put up with the Temple coin's disgusting images on obverse and reverse, and the wicked system of currency exchange.
Jesus's main objective was for the people to have 'Mercy and not Sacrifice'. He said so. Can I show you?

John 8:44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

That's John alright. He was so uninspired that he did not, could not describe the last week of Jesus's mission at Jerusalem.
Day 1. Jesus and group went to the Temple, spent the day there and looked about, then left peacefully.
Day 2. Jesus and group returned to the Temple, demonstrated against the money changers and picketed the Temple Courts, then left.
Day 3. Jesus and group returned to Temple, picketed the Temple Courts and debated with the confronting Priests. The crowd was with him.
.....and on...... you won't get such details in John, I'm afraid. It was John who caused so much Antisemitism over two thousand years. All false, imo.
John got the day of the trial and execution wrong, certainly different to the other gospels. He was not there.

 

[Deeje]

Do you see why I could not be a JW? We just don't believe in the same things.

Yeah....I know.....but you are such a lovable Old B_adger......I won't give up on you.....

 

[firedragon]

OK.....this what we would pick out of that creed.....there is not one “stumper” but a plethora of them....

This quoted from Wiki....(a sampling only)

“Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this:”

Straight away there is a red flag......this would be the holding of the “catholic” faith rather than the ”Christian” faith.
By comparison, there is little that the catholic faith has in common with original Christianity, in fact, it is a complete departure. Adoptions of non-Christian concepts rendered their claim to be “Christian” a complete contradiction (2 Corinthians 6:14-18)......not surprising really because this apostasy was foretold by Jesus and the apostles. (Matthew 13:36-43; 2 Peter 2:1-3; 2 Thessalonians 2:3)

“that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal.”

To worship “one God in trinity” is a concept completely absent from scripture. The Jews had no such concept. (Deuteronomy 6:4) Yahweh was one, never three, but non-Abrahamic religions already had trinities of gods. (e.g. Egypt)

Jesus was Jewish and taught from Jewish scripture. There is not even a hint of shared “personhood” or “essence”, since these terms are never applied to Yahweh. If each is God, you do not have three persons, but three gods.....that is polytheism in disguise.

“Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated.”

The Father is definitely uncreated, (the only eternal Being in existence) and his holy spirit, which we believe to be his unlimited power in action, (always directed by him) has always been his possession.....but his “only begotten son” is a created being who existed “with” the Father since the “beginning” of his existence. (John 1:1)

Since the Father was always God, until he created his son, he was not a Father, he is the ‘begetter’ or creator of this personage he calls his son. (Colossians 1:15-17; Revelation 3:14) So, the son is definitely a created being, who was used by the Father in the creation of all things, both in heaven and on earth. Proverbs 8:30-31 explains the “us” and “our” in Genesis 1:26....this “Master Workman” was at his Father’s side throughout the lengthy process of creation.

“So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty.”

The title “Almighty” is applied to Yahweh alone. Jesus is never called “almighty” and neither is the holy spirit because they are not Almighty God, but are closely related to him and the accomplishment of his will and purpose.

There is not one mention of a “holy ghost” in any scripture. The word “ghost” (as understood in English of an invisible entity, usually the spirit of a dead person, who manifests visibly in some way) does not exist in any Bible verse.

“Ghost” is a German Word (geist) but it simply means a spirit.
The Bible says that God is a spirit and so are all who dwell with God in that realm. The only “spirits” (who interacted with humans) in the Bible are either angels or demons. Angels only appeared in materialised form because God’s law forbade communication with spirits. (Deuteronomy 18:9-12.....spiritism was something that was common in Canaanite paganism) This protected God’s people from contact with deceptive spirits (demons) who were out to lead them away from God. These spirits could communicate with humans only through “spirit mediums” whom God banned from the land of Israel. They were never spirits of the dead because there is no such thing. There is no teaching of an immortal soul in the Bible.

“So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God.”

This is three gods. Squeezing three gods into one “head” is not something the Bible ever suggests. Even the Catholic Church admits that the trinity is not found in scripture.

“So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords.”

The Holy Spirit is never called either “God” or “Lord”. Yahweh is addressed by name almost 7,000 times in the Hebrew scriptures and when the Jews began to use a substitute for God’s name (Adonai “Lord”) in their speech (but retaining it in written form) the pronunciation was eventually lost. So in the Christian scriptures there are two “Lords” spoken about, but since Catholic doctrine fused these two together, firstly a duality was formed, (Father and Son) leading to the eventual declaration of a triune god with the inclusion of the holy spirit in a trinity. And this was over 300 years after Christ’s death. How odd that God would hide his true identity from humankind for so long, and that an apostate church should be granted this information that changed the nature of God forever in the minds of those it managed to keep in ignorance for centuries, feeding them this rubbish and masking the true nature of God.

“...Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell; rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved.”

Here we have a familiar part of the creed.....where Christ descended into “hell” which is “hades” in Greek and the equivalent of “sheol” in Hebrew, which never meant a place of conscious torment according to Solomon. (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10) it was a place of complete unconsciousness.....so “Rest in Peace” on gravestones means exactly that.

The son ascended into heaven to “sit at God’s right hand” but there is not one mention of the holy spirit sitting at his left hand.

The judgment that is to come will see Jesus giving these pretenders their just desserts. (Matthew 7:21-23) Just as he condemned the religious leaders in his day, so will he likewise condemn the religious leaders of today who follow what the Catholic Church formulated all those centuries ago, imagining that their “Christianity” is acceptable to the Christ whose teachings they do not follow.

Nuff said.....?

I apologise for asking you and I really appreciate your absolutely comprehensive response to my request. I will cut and paste this. Thanks again.

 

[Deeje]

I apologise for asking you and I really appreciate your absolutely comprehensive response to my request. I will cut and paste this. Thanks again.

No worries......Bible study is not my hobby...it is my passion. Ask whatever you like.....I doubt you could ask a question that I haven't researched already .....When I left Christendom, I knew why. Nothing would draw me back.

 

[oldbadger]

Yeah....I know.....but you are such a lovable Old B_adger......I won't give up on you.....

Nor does Keith, nor his wife Pauline. They've been drinking my dreadful coffee and my wife's brilliant coffee for about 30 years now. Wonderful folks........

 

[Deeje]

Nor does Keith, nor his wife Pauline. They've been drinking my dreadful coffee and my wife's brilliant coffee for about 30 years now. Wonderful folks........

Give them my warmest love if covid permits them a next visit....we have stopped all face to face visits here in Oz. All our interactions are now via the net or the phone. Who knew that a virus could interrupt life as we know it.....and turn the world upside down?

 

[firedragon]

No worries......Bible study is not my hobby...it is my passion. Ask whatever you like.....I doubt you could ask a question that I haven't researched already .....When I left Christendom, I knew why. Nothing would draw me back.

Hmm. Haha, I was asking specific questions about the faith of the JW's you know because I honestly dont know any JW's scholars and have not really gone into theology of it. I have noted for years and years that most people dont really answer a simple question with a simple or in-depth explanation but they get offended or say a lot of things like a sermon someone would give to rosy up another and convert him. This is why its very difficult to get answers to a question from people. But I must say that Christians as a whole have immense scholarship and you learn this scholarship in academia. But that's not theology. TO understand the theology you have to ask questions from the faithful because scholarship is not dominantly theological but analytical. The analytical side can be read in curriculum and books which are extensive, but the theology varies and especially JW's theology I have never read except one book I read when I was a child which I just liked for the pictures. In the midst of those who never answer directly, agree or disagree, I respect your responses.

Thanks for your input. And of course if I have more questions I would ask for sure, and I will. Cheers.

 

[oldbadger]

Give them my warmest love if covid permits them a next visit....we have stopped all face to face visits here in Oz. All our interactions are now via the net or the phone. Who knew that a virus could interrupt life as we know it.....and turn the world upside down?

Of course......
Our JWs still deliver the odd message or mag to our post boxes, and so when we saw them cycling on to our driveway we went out to them and gestured to chairs put outside for visitors. Had the most pleasant meeting and chat without breaking any rules. Where we live cycling was permitted right through the lockdown as a means of exercise, so out came the JW bikes.

The Witnesses have grown here, so quickly that the (fairly new and large) Kingdom Hall is much too small and the congregation is split in to East and West groups. These two groups rotate their meeting times between morning and afternoon congregations.

All the best,
OB

 

[Muffled]

Back what up? Your declaration of heresy and condemnation and damnations? Hmm. Of course you can. Anyone can justify many things. The problem is its not relevant.

Cheers.

I believe i have no need to justify but I do rectify.

 

[Muffled]

We're actually very simple people. We don't believe God, Jesus and the holy spirit are the same entity because there are a number of bible scriptures that make us believe otherwise. And we call ourselves Christian because we follow the teachings of Christ.
What other religious organizations do or believe is entirely up to them.

I believe the JW's have totally managed to misinterpret all those scriptures. In the past they altered their translation to eliminate passages that showed Him to be God in the Flesh. It is most certainly an a priori attitude with a desire to wrench the word of God into their own thinking.

I believe many do but then that is the stumper: you are a quasi Jesus follower but not a real Christian. I say quasi because there is too much of self in the interpretation of scripture and not enough Jesus.

 

[Muffled]

Of course......
Our JWs still deliver the odd message or mag to our post boxes, and so when we saw them cycling on to our driveway we went out to them and gestured to chairs put outside for visitors. Had the most pleasant meeting and chat without breaking any rules. Where we live cycling was permitted right through the lockdown as a means of exercise, so out came the JW bikes.

The Witnesses have grown here, so quickly that the (fairly new and large) Kingdom Hall is much too small and the congregation is split in to East and West groups. These two groups rotate their meeting times between morning and afternoon congregations.

All the best,
OB

I believe as PT Barnum said: There is one born every day. A sucker that is.

 

[firedragon]

I believe i have no need to justify but I do rectify.

Great.