Why do Jehovah's Witnesses falsify the Bible?

[sooda]

I said "in the minds of men" the Talmud became more important than God's word, but it was legalistically skewed out of all proportion....in much the same way as the Catechism is more important to Catholics than the Bible. Some I have spoken to over the years didn't know there was a difference.

ETA: Just to be clear....Jesus constantly castigated the Pharisees for their overstepping the Scriptures in his day to comply with tradition. They have continued to do that with commentaries like the Talmud being more important than God's word.

No.. you said something quite different .. You wrote: "When the Talmud basically replaced the Hebrew Torah in the minds of men, oral tradition scrambled the law into a nightmare of rigid not-picking."

The Talmud wasn't around.. Jesus would not have had any "feelings" about that.

 

[sooda]

Jesus appears to have no awareness of the Talmud

Now deeje is drawing the same conclusions about Catholic catechism.. Is THAT what defines the Jehovah's Witnesses?

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Now deeje is drawing the same conclusions about Catholic catechism.. Is THAT what defines the Jehovah's Witnesses?

The Catholic Catechism is a teaching tool that is not elevated to the same status as the Bible . It is a statement of faith attested to by the Sacred Scriptures (the Bible) and the Apostolic Tradition

 

[Deeje]

No.. you said something quite different .. You wrote: "When the Talmud basically replaced the Hebrew Torah in the minds of men, oral tradition scrambled the law into a nightmare of rigid not-picking."

The Talmud wasn't around.. Jesus would not have had any "feelings" about that.

Which was the reason for my edit....I wasn't clear. I clarified my statement which was not well worded.

What I said initially was....
"When Jesus said that God's word is truth, he was speaking about the Hebrew Scriptures as they were available to Jews in the first century. When the Talmud basically replaced the Hebrew Torah in the minds of men, oral tradition scrambled the law into a nightmare of rigid not-picking. Jesus denounced the Pharisees for doing that. Jesus and the apostles quoted from the whole of scripture, which Paul said was "inspired of God and beneficial for teaching..." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

You see I was talking about Jesus quoting from the Hebrew scriptures as they were available to Jews in the first century. The Pharisees were already relying more on oral traditions than God's word even back then.
Then I said "When the Talmud basically replaced the Torah in the minds of men", I was speaking about the later Jews relying oral traditions rather than God's word....which they still do.

Nit-picking....! sheesh!

 

[Deeje]

Did God give us reason and rationality? Did God tell us to test all things? The Bible doesn't explain itself, people explain it.

When 'people' explain the meaning of the scriptures, and it seems contradictory, then those people are wrong. God's word cannot contradict itself, nor can it speak with confusing messages that differ according to the time period. It is one book with one author and one message.....Scripture explains scripture.

Please show me where it doesn't.

 

[sooda]

Which was the reason for my edit....I wasn't clear. I clarified my statement which was not well worded.

What I said initially was....
"When Jesus said that God's word is truth, he was speaking about the Hebrew Scriptures as they were available to Jews in the first century. When the Talmud basically replaced the Hebrew Torah in the minds of men, oral tradition scrambled the law into a nightmare of rigid not-picking. Jesus denounced the Pharisees for doing that. Jesus and the apostles quoted from the whole of scripture, which Paul said was "inspired of God and beneficial for teaching..." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

You see I was talking about Jesus quoting from the Hebrew scriptures as they were available to Jews in the first century. The Pharisees were already relying more on oral traditions than God's word even back then.
Then I said "When the Talmud basically replaced the Torah in the minds of men", I was speaking about the later Jews relying oral traditions rather than God's word....which they still do.

Nit-picking....! sheesh!

You're still wrong. The formal end of both the Pharisees and the Sadducees came after the Romans quelled the Jewish revolt of 66-70 CE.

 

[Deeje]

Now deeje is drawing the same conclusions about Catholic catechism..

It is my personal experience with over 40 years of speaking to people about the scriptures, that Catholic belief relies more on the Catechism than on the Bible. It used to amaze me when people didn't know that the Catechism wasn't the Bible.
I would ask them to please get their own Bible so that I could show them a scripture and a good number of them came back with a Catechism. That is what I based my conclusion on. It is what I witnessed with my own eyes. It was an obvious conclusion.

Is THAT what defines the Jehovah's Witnesses?

JW's are defined by the fact that they teach what the Bible says, not what church tradition teaches. That means that, like Jesus we find that Christendom has done exactly what Judaism did.....exchanged the truth of God's word for the lies of false man-made traditions, borrowed from pagan Roman sun worship.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

When 'people' explain the meaning of the scriptures, and it seems contradictory, then those people are wrong.

All sects including yours do this. They have others (men usually) explaining scripture to other people.

God's word cannot contradict itself, nor can it speak with confusing messages that differ according to the time period.

Apparently it does. Why? Because scripture was written by different people who had different beliefs and theological agendas and also the editors and scribes of the Bible redacted what they didn't agree with or interpolated into existing scripture what they did believe or even corrected a text.

It is one book with one author and one message

It is a book of many authors and editors.

Scripture explains scripture.

Please show me where it doesn't.

You can start by explaining all these verses by scripture alone...not commentary but scripture.

Bizarre Sayings of Paul

 

[Deeje]

You're still wrong. The formal end of both the Pharisees and the Sadducees came after the Romans quelled the Jewish revolt of 66-70 CE.

What has that got to do with anything I said?.....Jesus castigated the Pharisees of his day for relying on oral tradition rather than on God's word.....the Jews who came later carried on with what they had always done.

 

[Tumah]

@Tumah

Yeah the Talmud is a book of commentary, but Deeje said it replaced the Torah in Jesus time. That makes no sense to me.. I thought the Talmud was still work in progress from the 2nd century to the 5th century AD.

Do you know anything about this?

The Talmud was transcribed around 350 CE and 500 CE for the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds respectively. What the Talmud presents, is what we call the Oral Torah. And that we've had with us since the beginning.
Christians who don't really know what it is, like to think that we give it more importance than the Tanach. Since the Talmud is essentially transmitted to us through the Pharisees, and the NT authors have Jesus castigating the Pharisees, they take a few leaps of faith and come to the conclusion that the Talmud is weighed more heavily than the Torah.
One of the main concerns of the Oral Torah is to transmit to us the tools we need to correctly understand the Tanach. It raises and answers questions about wording and sentence structure and transmits important measurements, in order to derive correct practice.

 

[sooda]

The Talmud was transcribed around 350 CE and 500 CE for the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds respectively. What the Talmud presents, is what we call the Oral Torah. And that we've had with us since the beginning.

Christians who don't really know what it is, like to think that we give it more importance than the Tanach.

Since the Talmud is essentially transmitted to us through the Pharisees, and the NT authors have Jesus castigating the Pharisees, they take a few leaps of faith and come to the conclusion that the Talmud is weighed more heavily than the Torah.

One of the main concerns of the Oral Torah is to transmit to us the tools we need to correctly understand the Tanach. It raises and answers questions about wording and sentence structure and transmits important measurements, in order to derive correct practice.

Thank you..

 

[Deeje]

All sects including yours do this. They have others (men usually) explaining scripture to other people.

You are leaving someone out of this picture....John 6:65
No one can come to an understanding of God's truth concerning his son unless they are granted that understanding by God. All we can do is be guided by what appeals to our heart. There is one truth and it is dispensed through one channel.....a slave in Christ's household is assigned to feed the rest of his fellow slaves, their "food at the proper time".....we have to find that slave and nourish ourselves at his table. (Matthew 24:45) There is another table but that serves poison. (1 Corinthians 10:21)

Apparently it does. Why? Because scripture was written by different people who had different beliefs and theological agendas and also the editors and scribes of the Bible redacted what they didn't agree with or interpolated into existing scripture what they did believe or even corrected a text.

I have never found this to be so. If it is God's word, then it cannot contradict and its theme must of necessity run from Genesis to Revelation as one story......I can see that it does....who are you listening to that says otherwise?

It is a book of many authors and editors.

I would say it is one book with one author and many secretaries. There are no contradictions in scripture...only contradictions in interpretation.

 

[Deeje]

You can start by explaining all these verses by scripture alone...not commentary but scripture.

Bizarre Sayings of Paul

Lets take them one at a time.....keeping in mind that these quotes are taken out of context....and many of these verses are not the whole quote.

One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, idle gluttons. This testimony is true. Titus 1:12-13

Paul found it appropriate to quote the words that apparently originated with Epimenides, a Cretan poet (prophet or spokesman) in the sixth century B.C.E. But Paul was agreeing with that description as applied to a particular segment of the Cretan population. These were the ‘profitless talkers and deceivers of the mind’ who were in contact with faithful Christians and were trying to ‘subvert entire households.’ Such subversive deceivers truly fit the description “liars, injurious wild beasts,” which was equally true of people like that elsewhere. (2 Timothy 3:6; 13) Paul was not making that statement about all Cretans but agreeing with a Cretan poet Epimenides made 600 years earlier about his own people.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Rulers are a threat to evil people, not to good people. There is no need to be afraid of the authorities. Just do right, and they will praise you for it. Romans 13:3

The apostles taught the Church to obey the laws of the land, and to respect those in authority because of their office, . . . to pay their appointed taxes, and except where they conflict with God’s laws (Acts of the Apostles 4:19; 5:29) to offer no resistance to any established law. (Romans 13:1-7; Matthew 22:21)
Those who cause no friction with the law are a welcome relief for those in authority. Those who are law abiding have nothing to fear from the authorities and are often praised as model citizens.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Women will be saved through childbearing 1 Timothy 2:15

Under inspiration Paul was discussing the proper attitudes and activities for women in a first century setting. One worthwhile and protective function for Christian wives was caring for their children. He said, if you quote the whole verse...."She will be kept safe through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and sanctification along with soundness of mind.”
Paul was discussing the proper frame of mind and duties for women. In the congregation their attitude should be one of submissiveness, recognizing that they are not to try to exercise authority over adult males. Exemplifying the difficulties that can result when a woman does not recognize her position, the apostle cites Eve’s case. She ran ahead of Adam, was deceived and came to be in transgression. (1 Timothy 2:11-14)
Later in this same letter Paul cautioned Christian women about their activities. Some of the younger widows were “unoccupied, gadding about to the houses; yes, not only unoccupied, but also gossipers and meddlers in other people’s affairs, talking of things they ought not.” These activities could lead to all sorts of trouble, including getting involved in giving advice and making decisions on matters that were properly the responsibilities of husbands or appointed servants in the congregation. God did not create women to compete with men but to be in a supportive role. A Christian woman has no issues with this.

________________________________________________________________________________________

From now on even those who have wives should be as though they had none 1 Corinthians 7:29

Again, in context this is speaking about the times. It is reminding those who take active roles in the congregation to put God's service first.
So how should we view Paul’s statement? With the remaining time clearly reduced and the end near, God’s people need to live in accord with the Bible’s counsel. So Paul’s words at 1 Corinthians 7:29 say....."Moreover, this I say, brothers, the time left is reduced. From now on, let those who have wives be as though they had none".
_________________________________________________________________________________________

But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment: and I think also that I have the Spirit of God. 1 Corinthians 7:40

In context, Paul is speaking about singleness and how it is of benefit to those who want to serve God undistracted by concerns over a mate. For one who is widowed he had this recommendation.....
"A wife is bound as long as her husband is alive. But if her husband should fall asleep in death, she is free to be married to whomever she wants, only in the Lord. 40 But in my opinion, she is happier if she remains as she is; and I certainly think I also have God’s spirit."

________________________________________________________________________________________

I have to brag. There is nothing to be gained by it, but I must brag about the visions and other things that the Lord has shown me. I know about one of Christ's followers who was taken up into the third heaven 14 years ago. I don't know if the man was still in his body when it happened, but God certainly knows.
As I said, only God really knows if this man was in his body at the time. But he was taken up into paradise, where he heard things too wonderful to tell. I will brag about that man, but not about myself, except to say how weak I am. 2 Corinthians 12:1-5

Writing to the Corinthian congregation, Paul stressed that God was using him as an apostle. He then mentioned “visions and revelations of the Lord.” Paul did not in that context mention other brothers. Thus, we believe that he was referring to himself as being the man who had received visions and revelations.

So Paul was the one who was “caught away to the third heaven” and “caught away into paradise.” (2 Cor. 12:2-4) He used the term “revelations,” which suggests a revealing of what will exist in the future.


Paul saw “the third heaven.” What was the point? The Bible occasionally repeats something three times for emphasis, to show intensity, or to imply added strength. It appears that in speaking of “the third heaven,” Paul was stressing a superlative, an exalted, form of rulership—the Messianic Kingdom by Christ. Since the "Paradise" is something yet future, we see that as a return to the original paradise conditions on earth. The Kingdom of God is a heavenly government with earthly subjects.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

I do not permit a woman to teach. 1 Timothy 2:9

"Let a woman learn in silence with full submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man, but she is to remain silent."
Women in the first century had a full understanding of God's headship arrangement. Right from the creation of Eve, women were to be a supportive complement to their husbands. Men were the appointed teachers and family heads. A woman was not permitted to teach in the congregation in Judaism either. It was not their place.
So any woman who stood up to question something in the middle of a Christian meeting would have been an unnecessary distraction to everyone else. She was to remain silent at that time and any questions were to be addressed to her spiritual shepherds or her husband at a later time.

____________________________________________________________________________________

We also gave you this rule: If you don't work, you don't eat. 2 Thessalonians 3:10

Paul as an apostle, could have lived off the hospitality of the brotherhood as he worked hard for their spiritual prosperity, but Paul did not take advantage of that provision and worked as a tentmaker to earn his own keep.

Verses 7-12 tell the story.....

"For you yourselves know how you should imitate us, because we did not behave in a disorderly way among you, 8 nor did we eat anyone’s food free. On the contrary, by labor and toil we were working night and day so as not to impose an expensive burden on any one of you. 9 Not that we do not have authority, but we wanted to offer ourselves as an example for you to imitate. 10 In fact, when we were with you, we used to give you this order: “If anyone does not want to work, neither let him eat.” 11 For we hear that some are walking disorderly among you, not working at all, but meddling with what does not concern them. 12 To such people we give the order and exhortation in the Lord Jesus Christ that they should work quietly and eat food they themselves earn."

Lazy people should expect others to feed them. Neither Judaism nor Christianity promoted a 'hand-out mentality. Both taught self-sufficiency. Both valued the dignity of hard work.

I don't see anything Paul wrote as being bizarre in any way for the times in which he wrote them.

 

[JJ50]

The JW cult brainwashes the poor people who are polluted by its sick garbage.

 

[Samael_Khan]

But from a logical viewpoint, there is either one God or there are many Gods because those are mutually exclusive.

It does not matter which scriptures or faith a person follows because that does not determine reality.
There is either one God or there are many Gods.

It is not necessary to have many Gods in order to represent God's attributes, since one God can represent all of is own attributes.

Hinduism is one of the oldest religions and it has ancient beliefs that have since been updated by the Abrahamic religions. If people want to hang onto those old beliefs that is their own choice since we all have free will to choose.

I am talking apart from what you or I personally believe. So, for instance, you saying that Hinduism is an outdated belief system is indeed your viewpoint but isn't objectively true.

I am talking about theoretical and objective possibilities. Logic dictates that a God can express himself however he/she/it wishes whether they don't need to do it that way. It is the same reason why humans express themselves through various art forms without actually needing to do it. Humans prove that sentient beings of a certain intellect will probably end up doing stuff for their own pleasure which is being doing what is just necessary. God creating creation, even though he didn't need to, would provide a good basis for God expressing himself in ways beyond necessity. The diversity in creation especially would also prove the point. So if God represents his different attributes through various Gods he creates, then that is plausible. Objective evidence doesn't point one way or the other.

And yes it does matter what scriptures say, since all religions viewpoint of God is defined by those scriptures, or at least are defined by the way God is claimed to communicate his nature to humans, whether it be prophets or experiences. Apart from them, we don't know objectively the truth about God, which is why there are so many different religions and atheists exist. And then the scriptures themselves are subjective.

 

[Samael_Khan]

The JW cult brainwashes the poor people who are polluted by its sick garbage.

That is not true actually. Brainwashing techniques are generally achieved through forceful manipulation and torture, so the person knows they are being brainwashed. JW's would definitely be against that as they are pacifists. At worst, JW's use undue influence, which is using subtle psychological techniques to gradually influence people without them knowing. In fact, undue influence is used in many walks of life. Everybody is affected by undue influence from birth. But what you are referring to is when undue influence is specifically used to undermine a persons viewpoint of reality in a way that harms them or others physically, mentally or emotionally.

 

[Samael_Khan]

The JWs are not far from what Baha'is believe about God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.
I am not sure what you mean by "the first creation." It is a Baha'i belief that the soul of Jesus (and all the other Manifestations of God) were pre-existent in the spiritual world, not that they were created.

The Baha’i Faith believes in a Trinity, and the detailed explanation is in this chapter: 27: THE TRINITY

Briefly, we believe that there are three separate entities involved: (1) God, (2) the Manifestation of God, and (3) the Holy Spirit, and they work together but they are not all part of God. (The Manifestation of God is also referred to as a Messenger or a Prophet.)

The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God. Jesus was a Manifestation of God to whom God sent the Holy Spirit and then Jesus brought the Holy Spirit to Earth. By bringing the Holy Spirit to Earth, Jesus shed the splendor of His glory upon all created things.

God is exalted above anything that can ever be recounted or perceived so never descends to Earth to become a man. Rather, God sends the souls of Manifestations of God such as Jesus from the spiritual world (heaven) and then their souls unite with their bodies at the moment of conception and they are born into a human body. Later, after these men reach a certain age, God sends the Holy Spirit to them as happened to Jesus with the dove. Moses received the Holy Spirit at the Burning Bush, Muhammad received the Holy Spirit from the Angel Gabriel, and Baha’u’llah received the Holy Spirit in the form of a Maiden. When these Manifestations of God receive et the Holy Spirit that is when they start talking about God to their disciples, or in the case of Baha’u’llah, writings things down. Then what they say or write is compiled into religious scriptures that humans can benefit from.

I actually am leaning towards the idea that the Bible speaks of manifestations of God from independent research before I understood the Bahai'i's viewpoint of it. It actually has historical backing in terms of what the original Israelites believed. Apparently some Jewish writers before Maimonides also had a similar concept.

Jehovahs Witnesses believe that Jesus is the Firstborn of God's creation and that God created everything else in existence through him. He isn't a manifestation of God in their view but a separate entity. Therefore he did preexist his human form as the Archangel Michael and he was a Master worker of creation besides God. Its is like he was the machine and God was the electricity operating through him if that is the correct analogy.

 

[sooda]

It is my personal experience with over 40 years of speaking to people about the scriptures, that Catholic belief relies more on the Catechism than on the Bible. It used to amaze me when people didn't know that the Catechism wasn't the Bible.

I would ask them to please get their own Bible so that I could show them a scripture and a good number of them came back with a Catechism. That is what I based my conclusion on. It is what I witnessed with my own eyes. It was an obvious conclusion.



JW's are defined by the fact that they teach what the Bible says, not what church tradition teaches. That means that, like Jesus we find that Christendom has done exactly what Judaism did.....exchanged the truth of God's word for the lies of false man-made traditions, borrowed from pagan Roman sun worship.

Well, perhaps you are only around poorly educated people??

"The Catholic Catechism is a teaching tool that is not elevated to the same status as the Bible . It is a statement of faith attested to by the Sacred Scriptures (the Bible) and the Apostolic Tradition."

 

[JJ50]

That is not true actually. Brainwashing techniques are generally achieved through forceful manipulation and torture, so the person knows they are being brainwashed. JW's would definitely be against that as they are pacifists. At worst, JW's use undue influence, which is using subtle psychological techniques to gradually influence people without them knowing. In fact, undue influence is used in many walks of life. Everybody is affected by undue influence from birth. But what you are referring to is when undue influence is specifically used to undermine a persons viewpoint of reality in a way that harms them or others physically, mentally or emotionally.

The JW cult is kicks anyone out who doesn't do it their way!

 

[Samael_Khan]

The JW cult is kicks anyone out who doesn't do it their way!

Not necessarily true. Only if the person is persistent after many interventions by the elders to try and "correct" their thinking. But shunning people is a form of undue influence, not brainwashing. It falls under behaviour control, as they cannot control whether other Witnesses shun the ex-JW's by force and haven't influenced them to do such by force. They influence Witnesses through psychological methods and information control to achieve behaviour control over its members.