• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

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

D

djhwoodwerks

Well-Known Member
JFish123 said:
The Watchtower believes that Birthdays are bad because for instance that Pharaoh had one (Genesis 40:22-22) the JW believe everything in the bible is there for a reason and since they think it portrays Birthdays in an unfavorable light, they must be evil or bad.
However the Watchtowers position is a clear case of guilt by association. Concluding that a particular day is evil because something bad happened on it is not good logic. For instance, Genesis 40:20 proves only that the Pharaoh was evil, not the birthdays. There is no command to celebrate birthdays, though there is no warrant to say that to do so is forbidden from Genesis 40:20 or in any other passage.
Remember, if were going by what Pharaoh did, he actually did something good as well on his birthday, such as declaring amnesty to the chief cup bearer (Genesis 40:21)-He set a man free! So if doing something evil on his birthday means birthdays are bad, then doing something good means there's something good about birthdays with the same logic.
Another "guilt by association" the watchtower uses is found in Matthew 14;6-10, where the NWT renders that when Herod the pagan had a birthday, that's when he had John the Baptist beheaded. Again that only proves Herod was evil, birthdays. You just have to ask yourself, what's the source of evil in these stories-the men who did evil, or the birthdays themselves?
And regarding birthdays in Biblical times, Bible scholar E.M. Blaiklock notes the following:
"The celebration of the anniversary of ones birth is a universal practice, for in most human cities the privileges and responsibilities of life are attached to the attainment of a certain age. The surviving census docents, dating back to A.D. 48, carefully record the age of those described and enrolled according to the requirements of the Roman census law, which implies an observance and counting of birthdays.
The birth of a child, according to Leviticus 12, occasioned certain rites and ceremonies. Under mosaic law age was the chief qualification for authority and office. The blind mans' parents declared that their son was 'of age' (John 9:21). There was significance in Jesus' visit to the Temple at 12 years of age."
From a is tori al and biblical perspective, birthdays spoken above had no evil associated with them. in fact, many scholars belief that birthdays are mentioned in Job 1:4:
"His (Job's) sons used to go and hold a feast on the house of each one ON HIS DAY, and they would send and invite their three sisters to eat and drink with them."
Scholars agree like Adam Clarke that, "it is likely a birthday festival is here intended. When the birthday of one arrived, he invited his brothers and sisters to feast with him; and each observed the same custom."
Nothing in the text indicate Job's children did evil things I this say. Their celebration is not portrayed as a pagan practice. And Job certainly does not condemn the celebration.
If the observance of birthdays was offensive to Jehovah, then Job-a man who "was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil".(Job 1:1) would have prevented this practice among his own children but did not for it was acceptable.
So the Watchtower, like the Pharisees in Jesus' day make man made traditions of you cannot do this or that without any biblical support.
Click to expand...


Absolutely true!! And to not worship Jesus like they say they do God, the JW's do obeisance to Him. Why not do obeisance or honor your relative on their birthday. The Bible does not teach against it.
 
K

katiemygirl

CHRISTIAN
Awoon said:
"Dead in Sin" means NOTHING to me. No Sin can separate any Human from an Omnipotent/Omniscient Spirit. If that is possible then there is Not an Omnipotent/Omniscient Spirit anywhere. Now it's up to you and you alone to decide for yourself which words of which ancient writing can SAVE you.

Religious trappings have you believing you are separate and need "saved" from something for something. Well I'll agree, you are saved to be a slave to the Christian religion that uses an ancient Semitic book and God that it adopted as their own.
Click to expand...
You have a very obvious lack of Biblical knowledge.

*Mod Edit*
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Awoon

Well-Known Member
katiemygirl said:
You have a very obvious lack of Biblical knowledge.

Not to mention you're a rude and unfriendly person. Goodbye!
Click to expand...

I'm not "rude" nor do I lack any biblical knowledge. You quoted Paul and his "Dead in your sins" scripture. It means nothing to me, I don't sin. Now if you sin then you are the one to answer the question you asked, not I.
 
Pegg

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Awoon said:
"Dead in Sin" means NOTHING to me. No Sin can separate any Human from an Omnipotent/Omniscient Spirit. If that is possible then there is Not an Omnipotent/Omniscient Spirit anywhere. .
Click to expand...

It certainly separated Adam from his creator. After Adam sinned, God refused to communicate with him.... Adam was removed from Gods presence and became alienated.

So it is possible and it has happened.
 
Pegg

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
djhwoodwerks said:
Good evening Pegg. I hope your day was great.

I kind of understand the blood issue or, maybe not. But birthdays, I don't understand. Other holidays, I can live without , they don't really mean anything to me. But birthdays, the JW's belief is just someone teaching their opinion. Are we not to honor our husbands and wives? Can we not honor our family on their birthdays? Can we not do obeisance to them? Just because we choose to honor our children or our mother, dad, sister, brother, children doesn't mean we give them the same kind of worship we give God. JW's call it obeisance to Jesus so they don't worship him the same way they worship God. The Bible says to give honor to whom honor is due.
Click to expand...

if you look into the origin of birthday's you'll see that they originate with religion. The birthday celebration was a religious ceremony. Just tell me this...where in the bible account do you read of Jesus celebrating his birthday?

In trying to live 'in Christ' we should be striving to live 'as Christ' lived. He didnt celebrate birthdays so why should I? If it wasnt important to Jesus then its not important to me.
 
A

Awoon

Well-Known Member
Pegg said:
It certainly separated Adam from his creator. After Adam sinned, God refused to communicate with him.... Adam was removed from Gods presence and became alienated.

So it is possible and it has happened.
Click to expand...

That's a LIE and you know it. God talked to Adam and Cain after they were out of the garden more then before. Read the story. BTW do you still live at home with your Mom and Dad? Did you leave home because you Sinned or grew up and became an adult?
 
Pegg

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Awoon said:
That's a LIE and you know it. God talked to Adam and Cain after they were out of the garden more then before. Read the story. BTW do you still live at home with your Mom and Dad? Did you leave home because you Sinned or grew up and became an adult?
Click to expand...

God spoke to Cain, yes. But tell me where he spoke to Adam after he had expelled him from Eden?
 
J

JFish123

Active Member
Awoon said:
I'm not "rude" nor do I lack any biblical knowledge. You quoted Paul and his "Dead in your sins" scripture. It means nothing to me, I don't sin. Now if you sin then you are the one to answer the question you asked, not I.
Click to expand...
You haven't sinned? You mean you've never told a lie, or taken something that wasn't yours, you've never lusted at anyone? WOWWIE! Hey, maybe on Sundays we should all go to your house and sit around you? ;)
 
D

djhwoodwerks

Well-Known Member
Awoon said:
I'm not "rude" nor do I lack any biblical knowledge. You quoted Paul and his "Dead in your sins" scripture. It means nothing to me, I don't sin. Now if you sin then you are the one to answer the question you asked, not I.
Click to expand...

1Jo 1:7-10 (ESVST) . 8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
 
J

JFish123

Active Member
Pegg said:
Yes, of course HE is. But not all believers are following the leading of holy spirit. Not all believers accept the authority of his written word. Not all believers accept that mankind are born sinners, not all believers believe that Jesus was the Son of God.

I agree with you that any believer who has Gods spirit has God. But I dont agree that all have Gods spirit.



Anyone who claims to be walking by spirit, will also abide by Gods written word. Our refusal of blood is in adherence to Gods laws about blood. Our refusal to celebrate birthdays is in adherence to Gods laws regarding false worship and practices. Sorry if you can't see that, but I can and thats probably why I'm one of Jehovahs Witnesses and you are not.
Click to expand...
Now on to blood transfusions... Many people have died heeding the Watchtowers prohibitions on blood transfusions. Former Jehovahs Witnesses Leonard and Majorie Chretian commented:
"(One man told of) the heart rending decision he was forced to make between his religion and his child. His baby boy was born with a serious hernia. An immediate operation was required to save the child's life, but that it would require a blood transfusion. Jehovahs Witnesses are taught that this is against Gods law, and the penalty for not obeying this rule (at the time was) removal from the organization and isolation from all friends and family members who are Witnesses. The heartbroken father choose to obey "Gods law" and two days later, his baby died."
It is tragic that hundreds if not thousands of Jehovahs Witnesses and their children have died because they have put their confidence in this Distorted Watchtower interpretation of "blood" passages In the bible. The Watchtowers disallowal of a transfusion for the above mentioned babies reminds one of how harsh-minded and heartless Pharisees condemned and chastised Jesus for healing someone On the Sabbath (Luke 6:6-11).
Would you really allow your baby to die because of instructions from the Watchtower society?
The Watchtower has had a very bad track record regarding changing it's position on medical issues. Take vaccinations for example. The Golden Age Magazine (1931) said that a "vaccination is a direct violation of the everlasting covenant that God made with Noah after the flood." Vaccinations were hence forbidden by the Watchtower Society for 20 years. However the Watchtower dropped it's prohibition in the 1950's. The Augusts issue in 1965 of 'Awake' magazine even acknowledged that vaccinations seem to have caused decrease in diseases. One must wonder how the parents of children who died as a result of NOT being vaccinated felt when the Watchtower Society suddenly reversed it view.
We find another example in the Watchtowers change of position on organ transplants. The November issue of The Watchtower magazine in 1967, said that organ transplants reverted to cannibalism and are not appropriate for Christians. Hence, organ transplants were forbidden for 13 years. During this time, many Jehovahs Witnesses died or suffered greatly as a result of not having such a transplant. But the Watchtower again changed it's view dating in another issue of The Watchtower magazine in 1980, that it wasn't necessarily cannibalistic and therefor allowed to them.
In light of the above changes, David Red comments:
"Given the Watchtowers track record of prohibiting vaccinations for 20 years then Reversing itself, and later banning organ transplants for 13 years before changing it's interpretation, one can only wonder how long it will be until the Society reinterprets the bible verses it now uses to forbid blood transfusions."
So, now with the Watchtowers history out of the way, let's consider if blood transfusions are biblical...
In his excellent book "Scripture Twisting", James Sire tells that the attempt to ban blood transfusions based in Genesis 9:4 and other such passages is a clear example of distortion of scripture." Indeed as he rightly points out that, "a transfusion replenishes the supply of essential, life sustaining fluid that has otherwise drained away or become incapable of performing it's vital tasks in the body. A blood transfusion is not even equivalent to intravenous feeding because the blood so given does NOT function AS FOOD."
Walter Martins agrees, commenting, "when one gives a transfusion, it is not a sacrifice of life, and the eating of forbidden blood, but a Transference of Life from one person to another, a Gift of Strength offered in a Spirit of Mercy and Charity (which is Love)."
Giving blood by transfusion is not 'feeding' as the blood is NOT received into the body as food. Eating is a literal taking in food in the normal manner through the mouth and into the digestive system.
And one final point. In the context of Genesis 9, it is the eating of animal blood that is prohibited, not the transfusion of human blood.
As Walter Martin and Norman Klann have observed:
"This verse, as it appears in Context, has not the remotest connection with human blood, much less blood transfusions. In the previous verse of the same chapter, Jehovah clearly tells Noah that He is speaking on reference to animals and THEIR flesh and that he should not eat THEIR blood. God told Noah that animal flesh was food with but one provision-that he eat not of the blood." Hence this verse does not prohibit the transfusion of human blood.
Sadly again, the Watchtower uses it's position to ban things that have no biblical vases to be banned and therefor a man made tradition just like the Pharisees in Jesus day. As always, please look into these things more for your soul is at stake. Thanks and as always, God Bless.
 
D

djhwoodwerks

Well-Known Member
Awoon said:
Nope !!!

Click to expand...


Rom 3:22-23 (ESVST) . For there is no distinction:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Rom 5:12 (ESVST) 12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned
 
A

Awoon

Well-Known Member
djhwoodwerks said:
Rom 3:22-23 (ESVST) . For there is no distinction:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Rom 5:12 (ESVST) 12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned
Click to expand...

If you want to believe the Bible and those verses, fine with me. I DONT HAVE TO BELIEVE.
 
D

djhwoodwerks

Well-Known Member
Pegg said:
if you look into the origin of birthday's you'll see that they originate with religion. The birthday celebration was a religious ceremony. Just tell me this...where in the bible account do you read of Jesus celebrating his birthday?

In trying to live 'in Christ' we should be striving to live 'as Christ' lived. He didnt celebrate birthdays so why should I? If it wasnt important to Jesus then its not important to me.
Click to expand...

If abstaining from blood was important to Jesus He would have said something about it. If it's not important to Him, I'm going to eat it. And you cannot say that He didn't celebrate birthdays, just as we cannot say that He did. Like the Bible says, if everything Jesus said and did were written down, the world couldn't hold all the books that would be written.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top