Why are Jehovah's Witnesses reluctant to discuss their faith?

[nPeace]

You are forgetting that Jesus will bring division, where children turn against their parents and siblings against siblings, friends against friends. That what Jesus meant by not bring peace, but the sword.

And history have shown that churches have turned against churches, sects against sects.

Paul saying one thing in Corinthians but Jesus saying something else. Whose words would know to be true, Jesus’ or Paul’s?

I'm not forgetting anything, and that interpretation is not scriptural, based on the fact that Jesus never indicated, suggested, nor said anything about churches, nor friends, in the scripture you likely have in mind. Matthew 10:34-37
Did you just make that up?

"Churches have turned against churches, and sects against sects?"
Really? As far as I know, religion has always been divided.

 

[gnostic]

I'm not forgetting anything, and that interpretation is not scriptural, based on the fact that Jesus never indicated, suggested, nor said anything about churches, nor friends, in the scripture you likely have in mind. Matthew 10:34-37
Did you just make that up?

"Churches have turned against churches, and sects against sects?"
Really? As far as I know, religion has always been divided.

Yes, you have cited Matthew 10, and for sure, it doesn't mention friends and churches. But if you bother to read it more carefully, it is not just talking about divisions among families, but division in general.

Re-read verse 34:

34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.

"...to the earth", nPeace, not just among family members.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

You are forgetting that Jesus will bring division, where children turn against their parents and siblings against siblings, friends against friends. That what Jesus meant by not bring peace, but the sword.

Jesus said “a man’s enemies will be persons of his own household”, that’s true. But a Christian should show love even to enemies.
Matthew 5:44

How does that work? Simple, really....Jesus didn’t say that his follower would be the enemy (of someone.)
Rather, that they would be the enemy of his follower.

Big difference! Otherwise, how could Christ’s followers distinguish themselves as being loving? — John 13:34-35

Paul saying one thing in Corinthians but Jesus saying something else. Whose words would know to be true, Jesus’ or Paul’s?

Where, exactly? I hear this occasionally, but I’ve never found any contradictory statements.

 

[Audie]

Where, exactly? I hear this occasionally, but I’ve never found any contradictory statements.

To qualify as a JW one must develop the arcane
skill of seeing what is not there, and not seeing what
is.

 

[savagewind]

To qualify as a JW one must develop the arcane
skill of seeing what is not there,

That is right and true (so it can't be a real insult) They keep seeing the end of badness and the beginning of theocratic order in that God will finally rule.

and not seeing what
is.

They are not seeing that they are calling themselves Jehovah. (which, by the way, is a terrible sin. How do I know that? I have listened to Moses. But, I do not know if he was right.)

"Jehovah will not leave unpunished the one who takes up His name in a worthless way.i" Exodus 20:7

"Do not put your trust in princes*Nor in a son of man, who cannot bring salvation.c" Psalms 146:3

The Name of Jehovah means "saving grace" imho
But, the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses has taken it upon themselves to save us.

That is how they are calling themselves Jehovah.

 

[Audie]

That is right and true (so it can't be a real insult) They keep seeing the end of badness and the beginning of theocratic order in that God will finally rule.They are not seeing that they are calling themselves Jehovah. (which, by the way, is a terrible sin. How do I know that? I have listened to Moses. But, I do not know if he was right.)

"Jehovah will not leave unpunished the one who takes up His name in a worthless way.i" Exodus 20:7

"Do not put your trust in princes*Nor in a son of man, who cannot bring salvation.c" Psalms 146:3

The Name of Jehovah means "saving grace" imho
But, the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses has taken it upon themselves to save us.

That is how they are calling themselves Jehovah.

Seems a little far fetched, you could be the president's
witness without claiming to be chief executive.

 

[savagewind]

Seems a little far fetched, you could be the president's
witness without claiming to be chief executive.

They do not claim to be Jehovah! They mean to be.

 

[Audie]

They do not claim to be Jehovah! They mean to be.

I dont know what you mean by that.

 

[savagewind]

I dont know what you mean by that.

I know. Nobody does.

If what they say happens then who can be credited with getting us there? Jehovah? No!

I realize that it isn't something real to worry about but I think that I might warn them, never the less.

 

[Audie]

I know. Nobody does.

If what they say happens then who can be credited with getting us there? Jehovah? No!

I realize that it isn't something real to worry about but I think that I might warn them, never the less.

I sure dont worry about it, it is all just kids
playing star wars, afaic.

 

[savagewind]

I sure dont worry about it, it is all just kids
playing star wars, afaic.

THEY warn me about sin.....I warn them back.

 

[Audie]

THEY warn me about sin.....I warn them back.

They never know what I say back to them, for lo,
they never know Cantonese.

 

[nPeace]

Yes, you have cited Matthew 10, and for sure, it doesn't mention friends and churches. But if you bother to read it more carefully, it is not just talking about divisions among families, but division in general.

Re-read verse 34:


"...to the earth", nPeace, not just among family members.

(Matthew 10:34-37)
34 Do not think I came to bring peace to the earth; I came to bring, not peace, but a sword.

35 For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 Indeed, a man’s enemies will be those of his own household. 37 Whoever has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and whoever has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me.

Not rocket science.

 

[nPeace]

Jesus said “a man’s enemies will be persons of his own household”, that’s true. But a Christian should show love even to enemies.
Matthew 5:44

How does that work? Simple, really....Jesus didn’t say that his follower would be the enemy (of someone.)
Rather, that they would be the enemy of his follower.

Big difference! Otherwise, how could Christ’s followers distinguish themselves as being loving? — John 13:34-35


Where, exactly? I hear this occasionally, but I’ve never found any contradictory statements.

This is a good point.
Peace exists among Christ's followers, so when Jesus said he did not come to bring peace, he had to be specific in clarifying what he meant... and he did.
He knew that the truth would divide households. The world was already divided, with the religious sects, and all.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

To qualify as a JW one must develop the arcane
skill of seeing what is not there, and not seeing what
is.

Lol.

There’s so much you don’t understand, little one!

There are things I don’t understand, that others do...but I don’t accuse them of “seeing what is not there.” That would border on arrogance.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Lol.

There’s so much you don’t understand, little one!

There are things I don’t understand, that others do...but I don’t accuse them of “seeing what is not there.” That would border on arrogance.

Tom Cruise sees and understands his inner immortal Thetan to the point of calling himself an "operating thetan" who is capable of manipulating space and time.

Would you really consider it "arrogant" to say that Tom Cruise is seeing things that aren't there?

Be honest now....

 

[savagewind]

Lol.

There’s so much you don’t understand, little one!

There are things I don’t understand, that others do...but I don’t accuse them of “seeing what is not there.” That would border on arrogance.

There is something else you do not see. It is the love that you have for your brothers. It is for the most part only a show of love. I know because if two of you leave off being a JW each one of you will then consider the other like nothing. Please do not say it isn't so! I know it is so. It has happened many times to me. I have not met even one friendly former Jehovah's Witnesses. If I was their sister then, how am I not their sister now?

 

[Audie]

Tom Cruise sees and understands his inner immortal Thetan to the point of calling himself an "operating thetan" who is capable of manipulating space and time.

Would you really consider it "arrogant" to say that Tom Cruise is seeing things that aren't there?

Be honest now....

Intellectual honesty is impossible for creos

 

[Audie]

Lol.

There’s so much you don’t understand, little one!

There are things I don’t understand, that others do...but I don’t accuse them of “seeing what is not there.” That would border on arrogance.

Actually, no, it is not arrogant at all to
observe others' demonstrated behaviour.

Arrogance consists of, for one part,
a sense of superiority- see your whole
first senrence, including reference to me
as"little one".

Second, an inflated sense of one's own
capabilities and status.

I will let your fellow "theists" joust with
you over who has the true religion;
they match arrogance for arrogance there.

So on to your presenting that you know
more geology than not just me with only
a bachelors, but every geologist on earth.

Likewise every physicist, chemist, etc.
To know what you claim to know
demonstrates this: no need to be coy.

All without even having to study.

While such a self evaluation is entirely
congruent with "arrogance", it borders on,
or dives deep into something else.

We've a clear example above, of not seeing what is there.

Oh, and "see what aint there"...we could cite
such as your "young looking mountains"
but seeing "vast herds of grazing animals" in
a temperate climate* arctic, and proof of
"the flood" in a few pieces** of stinky mammoth
remains, that is sufficient sign seeing things that
are not there.

Seeing what nobody else can see is actually called,
what? See ifn your dictionary helps.

*all vegetation found associated with said mammoths
are boreal species. Your preacher claimed palm trees.

** what is it, two that are mostly intact?

 

[paarsurrey]

Specifically, I'm wondering why Jehovah's Witnesses seem so hesitant to even consider, let alone talk about, how being a JW plays a role in shaping their views on science.

Over the last couple of years I've discussed and debated various science-related issues with JWs (mostly evolutionary biology), and for the most part it goes like any other stereotypical interaction with creationists. However, as soon as I even mention the possibility that maybe being a JW, and facing all the social and emotional consequences that would ensue should they waver from JW doctrine on the subject, plays a role in how they view the science (the data, analyses, and conclusions), the conversation usually shuts down very quickly. In one case here at RF, the JW immediately, and rather angrily, put me on ignore.

Why is that? Many creationists from other denominations I've discussed this with don't seem to have a problem acknowledging how their belief in scripture influences their views on science. In fact, they usually seem quite proud of it.

But not Jehovah's Witnesses. It seems to me as soon as someone says something like "Well of course you reject that, you're a Jehovah's Witness...you have to", the JWs tend to get quite upset. It's almost like they're ashamed of their own religion's doctrine or something.

Any thoughts on why that might be?

" Jehovah's Witnesses seem so hesitant to even consider, let alone talk about, how being a JW plays a role in shaping their views on science."

The truthful religion should not interfere with science. The domain of Science is limited to a partial aspect of human life and Religions deal the whole life; its ethical,moral and spiritual aspects and tells the purpose of life. Religion and Science are complementary not contradictory of one another.
JW's should amend their approach to science. Right, please?

Regards