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

[Wharton]

The Catholic Encyclopedia : “In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word τρίας [triʹas] (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A. D. 180.

Vocabulaire biblique (1954, p. 72) : “No New Testament writings supply explicit assurance of a triune God.”

Ian Henderson, University of Glasgow - Encyclopedia International (1969):
“The doctrine of the Trinity did not form part of the apostles’ preaching, as this is reported in the New Testament.”—P. 226

London Observer reported on December 3, 1978:
“One of Britain’s leading Anglican theologians, the Rev. Dr Geoffrey Lampe, . . . has come out with a strong challenge to the historic Christian doctrine of the Trinity. . . . He said the Trinity doctrine—God consisting of three ‘Persons’—has ‘not much’ future.”

Berlin, Germany, Doctor of Theology J. Schneider:
“Jesus Christ does not usurp the place of God. His oneness with the Father does not mean absolute identity of being. Although the Son of God in his preexistent being was in the form of God, he resisted the temptation to be equal with God (Phil. 2:6). . . . Although completely co-ordinated with God, he remains subordinate to him.”—Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament (1965), Vol. 2, p. 606.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIV, page 295.“It is difficult, in the second half of the 20th century, to offer a clear, objective, and straightforward account of the revelation, doctrinal evolution, and theological elaboration of the mystery of the Trinity. . . . One should not speak of Trinitarianism in the New Testament without serious qualification. . . . When one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4th century.”

Apostles Creed apparently written in the 4th/5th century:
M’Clintock & Strong’s Cyclopædia, Volume 2, pages 559-563
“I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost; born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into hell; the third day he rose from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen.”

I'm not asking you to believe what the WT has to say on the subject.... but believe these sources instead. We dont make it up as we go along, we do pay attention to what the scholars have to say.

Seriously? You need to stop quoting the Catholic Encyclopedia from the JW pamphlet on the Trinity. It is a joke that uses the old JW trick of .......... to leave out what the original source really states. How can you put your faith in an organization that attempts to deceive at every opportunity?

Here's the info JW's leave out to suit their purpose and deceive:

I. THE DOGMA of the Trinity-The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion-the truth that in the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons the Father the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these three Persons being truly distinct one from another. Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed: "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." In this Trinity of Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and the Son'. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent. This the Church teaches is the revelation regarding 'God's nature which Jesus Christ, the Son of God came upon earth to deliver to the world: and which she proposes to man as the foundation of her whole dogmatic system. In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word [tri'as] (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A. D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom" ("Ad. Autol.", 11, 15, P. G., VI, 1078). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Shortly afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian. ... It is manifest that a dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine revelation. When the fact of revelation, understood in its full sense as the speech of God to man, is no longer admitted, the rejection of the doctrine follows as a necessary consequence. For this reason it has no place in the Liberal Protestantism of today. The writers of this school contend that the doctrine of the Trinity, as professed by the Church, is not contained in the New Testament, but that it was first formulated in the second century and received final approbation in the fourth, as the result of the Arian and Macedonian controversies ... In view of this assertion it is necessary to consider in some detail the evidence afforded by Holy Scripture. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49)

 

[Pegg]

The WT quotes the scholars that support their doctrine. What about all the scholars that support the trinity doctrine?

of course... that is the whole point. Not all scholars believe the trinity is a biblical doctrine and they have good reason to conclude that.

Based on scripture, we agree with them.

 

[Wharton]

CCC 1471, "The doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of Penance." And the infallibility of the pope is unbiblical regardless how many times it's used. The pope isn't God.
And the dogmas the Catholic Church have are unchristian. Praying and asking dead saints to pray for you? Belief in purgatory which is waaaay unbiblical as well as full salvation only comes through the Catholic Church instead of just Jesus. Just a few examples.

I don't see selling of indulgences in CCC 1471, do you?

No, the pope is not God. He is a teacher, no more, no less.

So since you are a Protestant maybe you can answer the question I posted before. Prior to 1933 no Protestant denomination believed in birth control. What changed in scripture to allow the change? Who allowed the change?

BTW, I would assume that you think you're going straight to heaven when you die? You've confessed ALL of your sins of commission and omission? Your soul will be sin free at death so as to immediately enter into the presence of God? You best better pray there is purgatory or you'll be headed in the opposite direction.

 

[JFish123]

I don't see selling of indulgences in CCC 1471, do you?

No, the pope is not God. He is a teacher, no more, no less.

So since you are a Protestant maybe you can answer the question I posted before. Prior to 1933 no Protestant denomination believed in birth control. What changed in scripture to allow the change? Who allowed the change?

BTW, I would assume that you think you're going straight to heaven when you die? You've confessed ALL of your sins of commission and omission? Your soul will be sin free at death so as to immediately enter into the presence of God? You best better pray there is purgatory or you'll be headed in the opposite direction.

Problems with the Doctrine of Purgatory
As a Christian who bases spiritual truth on the Bible alone, I see problems with the doctrine of purgatory. For example:
It is not explicitly found in the Bible.
It implies that the righteousness of Christ does not cleanse from all sin.
It implies that justification is not by faith alone.
It implies that there is something we must do in order to be cleansed of sin. Works not Grace. As if Jesus' death wasn't enough. Well, was it enough?
And whether they agreed or not before or after, that birth control is ok or not is irrelevant so much as they hold to the Truth about it biblically today.

 

[Kolibri]

So the scriptures that prove it mean nothing?

If the Scriptures proved it, it would mean something, but Hebrew 1:8 is unclear. It can validly be translated both ways. And besides, it is a quote of Psalms 45:6,7.

The Psalms was initially about a king. (Ps 45:1)
It would have been blasphemy to claim that the human king of the Psalms was God himself.
Rather it says 'God has blessed you forever' in verse 2, not 'you have blessed yourself, O God.'

 

[JFish123]

of course... that is the whole point. Not all scholars believe the trinity is a biblical doctrine and they have good reason to conclude that.

Based on scripture, we agree with them.

Based on your scripture which is not just biased but even deceitful. The Watchtower will pay a heavy price at the judgement leading people astray like that. I pray your not one of them when the bell tolls and the trumpets sound...

 

[Wharton]

Problems with the Doctrine of Purgatory
As a Christian who bases spiritual truth on the Bible alone, I see problems with the doctrine of purgatory. For example:
It is not explicitly found in the Bible.
It implies that the righteousness of Christ does not cleanse from all sin.
It implies that justification is not by faith alone.
It implies that there is something we must do in order to be cleansed of sin. Works not Grace. As if Jesus' death wasn't enough. Well, was it enough?
And whether they agreed or not before or after, that birth control is ok or not is irrelevant so much as they hold to the Truth about it biblically today.

If Jesus' death cleanses from all sin, then why did he preach hell?

So the Church erred for 1900 years on its interpretation of scripture regarding birth control?

Unfortunately, justification is not by faith alone. That's a nice get out of jail free concept but hardly workable for the majority of mankind.

 

[Pegg]

If Jesus' death cleanses from all sin, then why did he preach hell?

So the Church erred for 1900 years on its interpretation of scripture regarding birth control?

Unfortunately, justification is not by faith alone. That's a nice get out of jail free concept but hardly workable for the majority of mankind.

The biblical hell is the grave, nothing more. Those who reject Jesus as their savior will go to hell. Thats the consequences of not putting your faith in and submitting to the Christ.

God has been saying it all along.... "i have put life and death before you"

 

[JFish123]

If Jesus' death cleanses from all sin, then why did he preach hell?

So the Church erred for 1900 years on its interpretation of scripture regarding birth control?

Unfortunately, justification is not by faith alone. That's a nice get out of jail free concept but hardly workable for the majority of mankind.

Because people have to choose Jesus. Those who don't end up in hell. If works are in involved that means Jesus death on the cross was meaningless. Faith plus works is unbiblical to the Nth degree. And I don't think they had birth control pills hundreds if years ago so how could they?

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Seriously? You need to stop quoting the Catholic Encyclopedia from the JW pamphlet on the Trinity. It is a joke that uses the old JW trick of .......... to leave out what the original source really states. How can you put your faith in an organization that attempts to deceive at every opportunity?

That's what they do because they have such a control of the minds of their people. They don't have to worry about them doing any research on what they teach. As in their doctrine of the "CROSS"



*** rs p. 89 par. 1 Cross *** (Reasoning from the scripture)
The Greek word rendered “cross” in many modern Bible versions (“torture stake” in NW) is stau·rosʹ. In classical Greek, this word meant merely an upright stake, or pale. Later it also came to be used for an execution stake having a crosspiece. The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·rosʹ], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. . . . Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376.



CROSS, CRUCIFY. The Greek word for cross, stau-ros, properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling a piece of ground.... (then you have their famous "...." four dot ellipsis which replaces) But a modification was introduced as the dominion and usages of Rome extended themselves through Greek-speaking
countries. (then they give a little more to prove their doctrine) Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole, (and then they leave out) and this always remained the more prominent part. But from the time that it began to be used as an instrument of punishment, a transverse piece of wood was commonly added: not. however, always even then. For it would seem that there were more kinds of death than one by the cross; this being sometimes accomplished by transfixing the criminal with a pole, which was run through his back and spine, and came out at his mouth (adactum per medium hominem, (|ui per os emergat, stipitem. Seneca, Ep. xiv.) In another place (Consol. ad Marciam, xx.\ Seneca mentions three different forms: "I see"; says he, "three crosses, not indeed of one sort, but fashioned in different ways; one sort suspending by the head persons bent toward the earth, others transfixing them through their secret parts, others extending their arms on a patibulum". There can be no doubt, however, that the latter sort was the more common, and that about the period of the gospel age crucifixion was usually accomplished by suspending the criminal on a cross piece of wood. The Imperial Bible-Dictionary Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376. (emphasis mine)



I guess this applies to JW's also! When are you people going to open your eyes? You can download a .pdf copy of the Imperial Bible-Dictionary, read it for yourself!

*** it-2 p. 245 Lie ***
While malicious lying is definitely condemned in the Bible, this does not mean that a person is under obligation to divulge truthful information to people who are not entitled to it.

 

[katiemygirl]

Catholic teaching doesn't change.

Protestant and JW teaching change. Here's a question for you: prior to 1933 not one Protestant denomination believed in birth control. What changed in scripture to allow it? Who allowed the change?

1. I am not nor have ever been a protestant.

2. Prior to 1970, catholics were not given the wine at communion.

There are some RC churches that do offer it now.

That is a MAJOR CHANGE in doctrine!

Jesus commanded we do this in His memory. The RC heirarchy to it upon themselves to ignore Jesus' command by holding back the wine from the people for centuries.

Please spare me the ridiculous explanation of how the bread is representative of both elements. I've heard the claim before, and it's lame.

 

[katiemygirl]

@katiemygirl I did anwer it for you

A question is not an answer to a question. I don't understand why you won't answer or give an explanation of your doctrine.

Your organization has made 2 statements that contradict one another. I've asked you repeatedly to explain the contradiction. I'm asking you for the sixth time to please explain.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

New Catholic Encyclopedia says: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”

How can an organization that condemns the Catholics quote so much of their beliefs and teachings? If the JW's are the "ONLY TRUE" religion, why do you quote apostates?

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Did Jesus' disciples have to make adjustments in their expectations? Did Jesus reveal everything to them all at once? The first prophesy in Gen 3:15 was not understood for thousands of years....yet when the time was right, the details became manifest to God's servants. Clarifications keep coming as we expect them to. If the light was not to get brighter on our path, why would God tell us that? (Prov 4:18) If the "final part of the days" was not to see an abundance of knowledge made available for the refinement and cleansing of God's people, then why did Daniel tell us that they would? Why do you think they needed cleansing and refining? The answer is obvious to us. (Dan 12:4, 9, 10) Insight was only to be given to those who accepted the cleansing, the rest would understand nothing.

Please show me a scripture where someone prophesied a year or date that this was going to take place.

Gen 3:15 15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."




And saying it was not understood for a 1,000 years is an assumption. Where does it state that no one understood it? Why do you keep comparing the disciples? You ask, "Did Jesus' disciples have to make adjustments in their expectations?" Show me where they "made adjustments in their teachings."

 

[djhwoodwerks]

I will guess and say that no JW has ever read the whole chapter of Proverbs 4.

 

[katiemygirl]

"Pegg, post: 4339715, member: 23994"]no, it was actually the opposite. The early christians showed by their writings (including so-called church fathers) that they believed Jesus and Jehovah were two separate beings.

New Catholic Encyclopedia says: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”

The Encyclopedia Americana says: “Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”

The early church fathers believed, taught and wrote JESUS IS GOD.

Take the time and have the courage to read what these men wrote.

Ignatius of Antioch
"Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . predestined from eternity for a glory that is lasting and unchanging, united and chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God" (Letter to the Ephesians 1 [A.D. 110]).

"For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit" (ibid.,18:2).

"[T]o the Church beloved and enlightened after the love of Jesus Christ, our God, by the will of him that has willed everything which is" (Letter to the Romans 1 [A.D. 110]).

Aristides
"[Christians] are they who, above every people of the earth, have found the truth, for they acknowledge God, the Creator and maker of all things, in the only-begotten Son and in the Holy Spirit" (Apology 16 [A.D. 140]).

Tatian the Syrian
"We are not playing the fool, you Greeks, nor do we talk nonsense, when we report that God was born in the form of a man" (Address to the Greeks 21 [A.D. 170]).

Melito of Sardis
"It is no way necessary in dealing with persons of intelligence to adduce the actions of Christ after his baptism as proof that his soul and his body, his human nature, were like ours, real and not phantasmal. The activities of Christ after his baptism, and especially his miracles, gave indication and assurance to the world of the deity hidden in his flesh. Being God and likewise perfect man, he gave positive indications of his two natures: of his deity, by the miracles during the three years following after his baptism, of his humanity, in the thirty years which came before his baptism, during which, by reason of his condition according to the flesh, he concealed the signs of his deity, although he was the true God existing before the ages" (Fragment in Anastasius of Sinai’s The Guide 13 [A.D. 177]).

Irenaeus
"For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, Father Almighty, the creator of heaven and earth and sea and all that is in them; and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who announced through the prophets the dispensations and the comings, and the birth from a Virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the bodily ascension into heaven of the beloved Christ Jesus our Lord, and his coming from heaven in the glory of the Father to reestablish all things; and the raising up again of all flesh of all humanity, in order that to Jesus Christ our Lord and God and Savior and King, in accord with the approval of the invisible Father, every knee shall bend of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth . . . " (Against Heresies 1:10:1 [A.D. 189]).

"Nevertheless, what cannot be said of anyone else who ever lived, that he is himself in his own right God and Lord . . . may be seen by all who have attained to even a small portion of the truth" (ibid., 3:19:1).

Clement of Alexandria
"The Word, then, the Christ, is the cause both of our ancient beginning—for he was in God—and of our well-being. And now this same Word has appeared as man. He alone is both God and man, and the source of all our good things" (Exhortation to the Greeks 1:7:1 [A.D.

Tertullian
"The origins of both his substances display him as man and as God: from the one, born, and from the other, not born" (The Flesh of Christ 5:6–7 [A.D. 210]).

Origen
"Although he was God, he took flesh; and having been made man, he remained what he was: God" (The Fundamental Doctrines 1:0:4 [A.D. 225]).

Hippolytus
"Only [God’s] Word is from himself and is therefore also God, becoming the substance of God" (Refutation of All Heresies 10:33 [A.D. 228]).

Hippolytus of Rome
"For Christ is the God over all, who has arranged to wash away sin from mankind, rendering the old man new" (ibid., 10:34).

Cyprian of Carthage
"One who denies that Christ is God cannot become his temple [of the Holy Spirit] . . . " (Letters 73:12 [A.D. 253]).

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Our brothers have never claimed to know it all... and they are willing to adapt their teachings as their understanding improves. That takes courage and humility...two important Christian qualities that you would expect from a true Christian. I love it every time we receive a clearer understanding of our teachings.... it's awesome!

How can one teach without fully understanding what they are teaching? A "TRUE" teacher will with patience wait until they have "ACCURATE" knowledge before they teach something as "TRUTH". What would you think of a school teacher that taught your children the way the GB teach it's followers?


Mat 15:14 (ESVST) 14 Let them alone; they are blind guides. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit."

 

[katiemygirl]

Questions for JW's

Isaiah 7:14; St. Matthew 1:23 If Jesus Christ is not God Almighty, then who is Immanuel?

What is the meaning of Immanuel?

Why did the Holy Spirit, speaking through the prophet, say, "And they shall call His name Immanuel?"

Matthew 4:7 If Jesus Christ is not God Almighty, why, when the devil was tempting Jesus, "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"?

Mark 10:18, St John 10:14 If Jesus is not God, then can anyone say that He is good, when only God is good?

Deuteronomy 32:4, I Corinthians 10:4 If Jesus is not God, who is the Rock? Jesus Christ or God?

John 14:9 There is only one Father according to Malachi 2:1. If Jesus is not God, why did he say to Philip, "When you see Me you see the Father?"

 

[Robert William]

Questions for JW's

Isaiah 7:14; St. Matthew 1:23 If Jesus Christ is not God Almighty, then who is Immanuel?

What is the meaning of Immanuel?

Why did the Holy Spirit, speaking through the prophet, say, "And they shall call His name Immanuel?"

Matthew 4:7 If Jesus Christ is not God Almighty, why, when the devil was tempting Jesus, "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God"?

Mark 10:18, St John 10:14 If Jesus is not God, then can anyone say that He is good, when only God is good?

Deuteronomy 32:4, I Corinthians 10:4 If Jesus is not God, who is the Rock? Jesus Christ or God?

John 14:9 There is only one Father according to Malachi 2:1. If Jesus is not God, why did he say to Philip, "When you see Me you see the Father?"

Here is another great verse.

Heb 1:1 Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.
Heb 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
Heb 1:4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
Heb 1:5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son, today I have begotten you"? Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"?
Heb 1:6 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him."
Heb 1:7 Of the angels he says, "He makes his angels winds, and his ministers a flame of fire."
Heb 1:8 But of the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
Heb 1:9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions."
Heb 1:10 And, "You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands;
Heb 1:11 they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment,
Heb 1:12 like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end."
Heb 1:13 And to which of the angels has he ever said, "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet"?
Heb 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?

 

[djhwoodwerks]

John 14:9 There is only one Father according to Malachi 2:1. If Jesus is not God, why did he say to Philip, "When you see Me you see the Father?"

It's Malachi 2:10, but an awesome reference!