Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
THE PARAKLETOS

● John 14:16-17 . . I will request the Father and he will give you another helper to be with you forever, the spirit of the truth, which the world cannot receive, because it neither beholds it nor knows it. You know it, because it remains with you and is in you.

● John 14:26 . .The helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, that one will teach you all things and bring back to your minds all the things I told you.

John Q and Jane Doe non-anointed Watchtower Society missionaries are taught to believe that God's spirit is alongside assisting them to identify, and to understand, the correct interpretations of the Bible. However, the Society's missionaries are also taught that only a special guild of 144,000 anointed Jehovah's Witnesses actually have the spirit "inside" them rather than only alongside and that is very serious. Here's why:

● Rom 8:9 . .You are in harmony, not with the flesh, but with the spirit, if God's spirit truly dwells in you.

Seeing as how God's spirit does not truly dwell in John Q and Jane Doe missionary, then they are, by default, in harmony with the flesh. That only makes things worse. Here's why:

● Rom 8:5-8 . . For those who are in accord with the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those in accord with the spirit on the things of the spirit. For the minding of the flesh means death, but the minding of the spirit means life and peace; because the minding of the flesh means enmity with God, for it is not under subjection to the law of God, nor, in fact, can it be. So those who are in harmony with the flesh cannot please God.

The non-anointed situation is just too ironic for words: John Q and Jane Doe missionaries displease God, and He displeases them; yet they go door-to-door sincerely believing themselves Jehovah's friends and allies.
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
UNAPPROACHABLE LIGHT

POSIT: It is impossible for Jesus Christ to be in heaven as a human being in the presence of God because 1Tim 6:16 says that the king of all kings dwells in an unapproachable light, whom "not one of men" has seen or can see.

RESPONSE: The Greek word translated "unapproachable" also means inaccessible; which right there attests that humanity needs a mediator between itself and the light to provide them at least an indirect access.

Note that the passage below is misquoted. Watch for the revision.

"There is one God, and one mediator between God and men; an angel: Christ Michael." (1Tim 2:5)

No, that passage doesn't actually say "an angel" nor does it actually say "Christ Michael". Here it is for real.

"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men; a man: Christ Jesus."

The Greek word for men, as well as the word for man, is derived from anthropos (anth'-ro-pos) --a common koiné Greek word for human beings in the New Testament; in other words:

"There is one God, and one mediator between God and anthroópoon; an ánthroopos: Christ Jesus."

So it's readily seen from a cursory examination of the Greek that the mediator spoken of in 1Tim 2:5 is a human being rather than an angel.

Seeing as how Christ Jesus is allowed access to the inaccessible light as a human being, then it's safe to conclude that there has to be something very unusual about him.

Well; for one thing, his body is no longer that of mortal men. When he went up to heaven, Christ Jesus' body underwent a miraculous transformation. It's still human, that we know, but its chemistry is unlike any human body on Earth. (1Cor 15:50-53)

For another, Christ Jesus is not only human, but also divine (John 1:1, John 1:18, and Col 2:9). That alone would surely be enough to grant him some special privileges, and it does. For example: the angel Gabriel stands in the presence of God (Luke 1:19) while Christ Jesus the man is seated. (Col 3:1)
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
SHEOL / HADES

● Jonah 1:17 . . Jehovah appointed a great fish to swallow Jonah, so that Jonah came to be in the inward parts of the fish three days and three nights.

Q: Was Jonah alive in the fish?

A: Yes. (Jonah 2:1)

Q: The whole time?

A: No.

At some point in his nautical adventure Jonah went to a place called sheol (Jonah 2:2) which he sited at the bottoms of the mountains. (Jonah 2:6)

Well; the bottoms of the mountains aren't located in the tummies of fish, no; they're located down deep in the Earth. So, the only way that Jonah could possibly be at the bottoms of the mountains while in the belly of a fish at the same time was for the man and his body to part company and go their separate ways.

Christ paralleled his own afterlife journey with Jonah's.

● Matt 12:39-40 . . As Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the Earth.

Now when you think about it; Jesus' corpse was never in the heart of the Earth. It wasn't even in the Earth's soil. His corpse was laid to rest on the surface of the Earth in a rock-hewn tomb.

So, the only way that Jesus could possibly be in a tomb on the surface of that Earth while in the heart of the Earth at the same time; was for the man and his body to part company and go their separate ways.

Just before being cast ashore, Jonah prayed thus:

● Jonah 2:6 . . But out of the pit you proceeded to bring up my life, O Jehovah my God.

The Hebrew word for "pit" in that verse is the very same word for pit in Ps 16:8-10; which Acts 2:25-31 verifies is speaking of putrefaction. In other words: Jonah 2:6 tells of the prophet's flesh just as Ps 16:8-10 and Acts 2:25-31 tell of Christ's flesh.

"My own flesh will reside in security. For you will not leave my soul in Sheol. You will not allow your loyal one to see the pit." (Ps 16:9-10)

"you will not leave my soul in Sheol" speaks of the bottoms of the mountains, a.k.a. the heart of the Earth.

"You will not allow your loyal one to see the pit" speaks of putrefaction; viz: Christ's flesh was restored to life before nature's processes could dissolve it.

Q: What does the story of Jonah have to do with Jehovah's Witnesses?

A: JWs are taught to believe that human life is entirely physical; viz: when people die they cease to exist. Well; were that belief a reality; then Jesus would've ceased to exist when he passed away on the cross.

Jonah's experience is handy for illustrating Jesus' experience; viz: if Jonah existed at the bottoms so the mountains while his flesh was deceased in the tummy of a fish, then Jesus existed in the heart of the Earth while his flesh was deceased in a tomb.

Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites and also a sign to Jesus' generation (Matt 13:39-40, Luke 11:29-30). The word "sign" is translated from a koiné Greek word that's sometimes used in the gospels to indicate miracles.

Had Jonah stayed alive in the fish's tummy, that would not be the kind of sign that Jesus had in mind. He needed a miraculous event that would adequately depict his own; the reason being that Jesus' flesh was on track to be returned to life. (John 2:19-21)

Jonah, coupled with Ps 16:8-10, Acts 2:25-31, and Matt 12:39-40 proves that Jesus continued to exist out of body when he passed away; and if he and Jonah did, then there's reason to expect that everyone else does too.

My only question is: How was Jonah a sign to the people of Nineveh? The city was located up around northern Iraq; approximately 400 miles from the Mediterranean Sea. It's my guess travelers on their way to Nineveh witnessed Jonah exit the fish, and upon arrival in the city spread their amazing tale far and wide. If so, that would help explain why the people took Jonah's message to heart instead of mocking him as just another kooky itinerant preacher.
_

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again WeberHome,

.SHEOL / HADES
● Jonah 1:17 . . Jehovah appointed a great fish to swallow Jonah, so that Jonah came to be in the inward parts of the fish three days and three nights.
Q: Was Jonah alive in the fish? A: Yes. (Jonah 2:1)
Q: The whole time? A: No.
At some point in his nautical adventure Jonah went to a place called sheol (Jonah 2:2) which he sited at the bottoms of the mountains. (Jonah 2:6)
Well; the bottoms of the mountains aren't located in the tummies of fish, no; they're located down deep in the earth. So, the only way that Jonah could possibly be at the bottoms of the mountains while in the belly of a fish at the same time was for the man and his body to part company and go their separate ways.

There is no hint in the Jonah record that Jonah died, and the theory of a disembodied soul based on the figurative language does not help. Sheol is the grave or covered place, and without God’s intervention the stomach of the fish would have been his grave. Jonah prayed from the belly of the fish Jonah 2:7, not his immortal disembodied soul from hell. His consciousness was still in his body.

Christ paralleled his own afterlife journey with Jonah's.
● Matt 12:39-40 . . As Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Now when you think about it; Jesus' corpse was never in the heart of the earth. It wasn't even in the earth's soil. His corpse was laid to rest on the surface of the earth in a rock-hewn tomb.

Again “heart of the earth” is figurative language. Jesus was dead three days.

Q: What does the story of Jonah have to do with Jehovah's Witnesses?
A: JWs are taught to believe that when people die they cease to exist. Well; were that belief a fact; then Jesus would've ceased to exist when he passed away on the cross. As a result: he would not have been resurrected back to life, instead, Jesus would've been created back to life. Jonah's experience proves that Jesus continued to exist out of body when he passed away; and if he and Jonah did, then we have reason to expect that everyone else does too.

I do not agree with JWs who believe that the body of Jesus was not raised, but to use the phrase “cease to exist” misses the point, in that it was Jesus’ body that was in the tomb, and this body was repaired and raised from the dead. Jesus said “Lazarus come forth”, and it was Lazarus who was in the tomb for four days. Lazarus did not cease to exist, but he was dead.

My only question is: How was Jonah a sign to the people of Nineveh? The city was located up around northern Iraq; approximately 400 miles from the Mediterranean Sea. It's my guess travelers on their way to Nineveh witnessed Jonah exit the fish, and upon arrival in the city spread their amazing tale far and wide. If so, that would help explain why the people took Jonah's message to heart instead of mocking him as just another kooky itinerant preacher.

Whether his remarkable escape was witnessed, or possibly some evidence of bleaching was still present, he was a testimony to resurrection, not immortal souls.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
MATTERS OF CONSCIENCE

Some of the Watchtower Society's ethics rub people the wrong way. For example they don't celebrate birthdays, observe Christmas, participate in Halloween, serve in the military, nor allow blood transfusions.

Their feelings about special days are protected by the fourteenth chapter of Romans so it would be extremely unchristian to criticize them on that front.

Their feelings about blood transfusions appear tenable from the passages below.

● Gen 9:3-4 . . Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to you. Only flesh with its soul-- its blood --you must not eat.

● Lev 7:26-27 . .You must not eat any blood in any places where you dwell, whether that of fowl or that of beast. Any soul who eats any blood, that soul must be cut off from his people.

● Lev 17:10-As for any man of the house of Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an alien in your midst who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face against the soul that is eating the blood, and I shall indeed cut him off from among his people.

● Acts 15:19-20 . . Hence my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, but to write them to abstain . . from blood.

The Society construes those passages to imply that transfusing blood is all the same as using it for food.

Rather than get into a semantic quarrel with the Society over its interpretation of those passages; I suggest another tact. And our purpose is not to win a debate; only to offer a second opinion.

The Jews' sabbath law is very narrow. In point of fact, the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God imposes capital punishment for sabbath violators. (Ex 31:14-15)

Now, that is very interesting because Jesus broke the sabbath on a number of occasions, and when doing so based his actions upon the principle that human life, safety, and welfare trump strict observance of religious law.

One of the best illustrations I've seen of a die-hard legalist was a cartoon showing a man behind the wheel of his car stopped at a red light while huge landslide boulders are within seconds of crushing to death him, his family, and the family dog. While his wife and children shriek in mortal panic, the legalist calmly points out that he can't move the car until the light turns green.

Legalists typically refuse to accept the possibility of extenuating circumstances, which Webster's defines as: to lessen, or to try to lessen, the seriousness or extent of by making partial excuses; viz: mitigate.

Although it's illegal to run red lights, those boulders rumbling down the hill to crush the man's family to death unless he moves the car, are an acceptable excuse to go before the light turns green. In those kinds of cases, human life, safety, and welfare trump strict conformity to the law.

Compare Ex 1:15-21 where Jewish midwives lied through their teeth in order to save the lives of little Jewish boys. Did God punish the midwives for the sin of lying? No, on the contrary; He overlooked their dishonesty and instead rewarded the midwives' actions with families of their own. In point of fact, their actions were adjudged as fearing the true God. (Ex 1:21)

Should someone reading this section chance to discuss blood transfusions with a JW from Christ's sabbath perspective; I urge them to go about it with the utmost in civility because this is an emotional issue. Should your JW audience come to the realization that they've made a monstrous mistake, they will be overwhelmed with guilt, disappointment, and humiliation; not to mention fear of the organizational tsunami that'll come their way should they dare to question the Society's stance on blood transfusions.

● Col 3:12 . . Accordingly, as God’s chosen ones, holy and loved: clothe yourselves with the tender affections of compassion, kindness, lowliness of mind, and mildness.
_

 

[Danoh]

.
MATTERS OF CONSCIENCE

Some of the Watchtower Society's ethics rub people the wrong way. For example they don't celebrate birthdays, observe Christmas, participate in Halloween, serve in the military, nor allow blood transfusions.

Their feelings about special days are protected by the fourteenth chapter of Romans so it would be extremely unchristian to criticize them on that front.

Their feelings about blood transfusions appear tenable from the passages below.

● Gen 9:3-4 . . Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to you. Only flesh with its soul-- its blood --you must not eat.

● Lev 7:26-27 . .You must not eat any blood in any places where you dwell, whether that of fowl or that of beast. Any soul who eats any blood, that soul must be cut off from his people.

● Lev 17:10-As for any man of the house of Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an alien in your midst who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face against the soul that is eating the blood, and I shall indeed cut him off from among his people.

● Acts 15:19-20 . . Hence my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, but to write them to abstain . . from blood.

The Society construes those passages to imply that transfusing blood is all the same as using it for food.

Rather than get into a semantic quarrel with the Society over its interpretation of those passages; I suggest another tact. And our purpose is not to win a debate; only to offer a second opinion.

The Jews' sabbath law is very narrow. In point of fact, the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God imposes capital punishment for sabbath violators. (Ex 31:14-15)

Now, that is very interesting because Jesus broke the sabbath on a number of occasions, and when doing so based his actions upon the principle that human life, safety, and welfare trump strict observance of religious law.

One of the best illustrations I've seen of a die-hard legalist was a cartoon showing a man behind the wheel of his car stopped at a red light while huge landslide boulders are within seconds of crushing to death him, his family, and the family dog. While his wife and children shriek in mortal panic, the legalist calmly points out that he can't move the car until the light turns green.

Legalists typically refuse to accept the possibility of extenuating circumstances, which Webster's defines as: to lessen, or to try to lessen, the seriousness or extent of by making partial excuses; viz: mitigate.

Although it's illegal to run red lights, those boulders rumbling down the hill to crush the man's family to death unless he moves the car, are an acceptable excuse to go before the light turns green. In those kinds of cases, human life, safety, and welfare trump strict conformity to the law.

Compare Ex 1:15-21 where Jewish midwives lied through their teeth in order to save the lives of little Jewish boys. Did God punish the midwives for the sin of lying? No, on the contrary; He overlooked their dishonesty and instead rewarded the midwives' actions with families of their own. In point of fact, their actions were adjudged as fearing the true God. (Ex 1:21)

Should someone reading this section chance to discuss blood transfusions with a JW from Christ's sabbath perspective; I urge them to go about it with the utmost in civility because this is an emotional issue. Should your JW audience come to the realization that they've made a monstrous mistake, they will be overwhelmed with guilt, disappointment, and humiliation; not to mention fear of the organizational tsunami that'll come their way should they dare to question the Society's stance on blood transfusions.

● Col 3:12 . . Accordingly, as God’s chosen ones, holy and loved: clothe yourselves with the tender affections of compassion, kindness, lowliness of mind, and mildness.
_

You raise a point that many within Christianity itself never appear willingly aware of.

I once ran across a man I knew who was beating his son severely, til I stepped in and forced him to stop.

Turned out though he believed in "once saved, always saved," his teenaged son did not.

In other words, the man had somehow gotten it into his head that he had the right to force his God given grace (once saved, always saved) on his son, even if he had to beat it into him.

Years later, his son ended up in the world and wanting nothing to do with "the so called grace of God."

His father went on about how his son had brought that on himself. "For" as he so self-righteously put it, given his obvious hypocrisy, he had "given him the truth..."

These kinds of scenarios, while perhaps not as physically extreme as that one, are rather common within "Christianity."

Legalism is cult-like outlook every much as cult-like as all other aspects of the so called "marks of a cult."

Just look at the "bite and devour one another" it had resulted in, in the Galatians.

And then look all around you within Christianity.

The same old same, same old "in the name of Christ."

And there is...no reasoming with such.

Let alone, with such within an actual cult, like that of JWs.

All one can do is point such things out "if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will." 2 Tim. 2:25, 26.

Because Romans 5:6-8.

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
UNDESERVED KINDNESS

● John 1:14 . . So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of undeserved kindness and truth.

The ancient Greek word from which "undeserved kindness" is derived is charitos; which itself is derived from charis.

"undeserved kindness" isn't a translation of the word charis; it's the Watchtower Society's own opinion of what they think that word ought to mean. It's literal meaning is graciousness.

John Q and Jane Doe Witness are being deprived of viewing some very pleasant aspects of the only-begotten son's personality by interpreting charis to mean undeserved kindness because graciousness says some wonderful things about not only the flesh that the Word became; but also about the Father from whom the Word came.

To begin with; Webster's defines "graciousness" as; kind, courteous, inclined to good will, generous, charitable, merciful, altruistic, compassionate, thoughtful, cordial, affable, genial, sociable, cheerful, warm, sensitive, considerate, and tactful.

Cordial stresses warmth and heartiness

Affable implies easy approachability and readiness to respond pleasantly to conversation or requests or proposals

Genial stresses cheerfulness and even joviality

Sociable suggests a genuine liking for the companionship of others

Generous is characterized by a noble or forbearing spirit; viz: magnanimous, kindly, and liberal in giving

Charitable means full of love for, and goodwill toward, others; viz: benevolent, tolerant, and lenient.

Altruistic means unselfish regard for, or devotion to, the welfare of others; viz: a desire to be of service to others for no other reason than it just feels good to do so.

Tactful indicates a keen sense of what to do, or say, in order to maintain good relations with others in order to resolve and/or avoid unnecessary conflict.

Here's a couple of passages from the NWT where the Society's translation committee had the decency to let charis speak for itself instead of butting in to tell people what they think it ought to mean.

"Keep on teaching and admonishing one another with psalms, praises to God, spiritual songs with graciousness" (Col 3:16)

"Let your utterance be always with graciousness." (Col 4:6)

NOTE: The claim that the only begotten son is somehow undeserving of kindness is of course 110% false. Worthiness is in every fiber of Christ's being. (Dan 7:13-14, Phil 2:8-11, Rev 5:1-14, Rev 19:11)
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
THE BREATH OF LIFE

Human existence is thought by some to be entirely organic. It's not. There's a non-organic element to human existence called the breath of life.

● Gen 2:7a . . And Jehovah God formed a man's body

Mankind's creator didn't give birth to humanity like women give birth to children, or baby chicks hatch from eggs; no, humans aren't God's biological progeny --humans are God's handiwork like the glass products manufactured by craftsmen in Murano; where they make things from scratch using mostly sand for their base material.

● Gen 2:7b . . from the dust of the ground

The Hebrew word for "dust" is a bit ambiguous. It essentially refers to powder, but can also be translated clay, earth, mud, mortar, ashes, and/or rubbish.

● Gen 2:7c . . and breathed into it the breath of life

The word for "breathed" is from naphach (naw-fakh') and means; among other things: to kindle; which Webster's defines as (1) to start (a fire) burning: light, (2) to stir up: arouse, (3) to bring into being: start, and (4) to animate.

Naphach is sort of like what Indy Car drivers do when they're given the order to start their engines-- they light 'em up, so to speak: for example:

"What has come into existence by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men." (John 1:3-4)

The word for "breath" is neshamah (nesh-aw-maw') which means: a puff. Neshamah is a bit ambiguous and has been variously translated air, soul, spirit, blast, and inspiration.

What we're looking at here is a kind of artificial respiration, but not the regular kind because it doesn't do a bit of good pumping air into the lungs of a corpse. They won't come alive like that; it's been tried.

However, there's evidence in the Bible, starting in Genesis, indicating that it's possible to pump life into a corpse: in point of fact into anything, even stones (Matt 3:9, Luke 19:40).

● Gen 2:7c . . and man became a living soul.

The Hebrew word for "soul" is nephesh (neh'-fesh). Its first appearance is at Gen 1:20-21 in reference to aqua creatures and winged creatures; again at Gen 1:24 as terra creatures; viz: cattle, creepy crawlies, and wild beasts; and again in Gen 2:7 as the human creature.

Creatures within whom is the breath of life are perishable (e.g. Gen 7:21-22) but I have yet to encounter a passage in the Bible clearly stating that the breath of life itself is perishable. In point of fact, I think it is very easy to prove that the human creature's breath of life is not only a permanent feature of their existence; but also prevents them from going out of existence.

For example: when Abraham, Lazarus, and the rich man of Luke 16:19-31 passed away, they all left the organic portion of their existence behind-- viz: their bodies --yet on the other side they are perceptive; fully conscious, and fully sentient.

I don't know for sure in what form they exist on the other side, but one thing I do know is that they have not ceased to exist as individuals, nor have they lost their identities-- Abraham is still Abraham, Lazarus is still Lazarus, and the rich man is still the rich man; and that has to be because they retained their breath of life when they crossed over to the other side.

For example; in Watchtower theology, Michael the arch angel had to die in order to become a human being. Now, the amazing part of the story is that Michael didn't go completely out of existence when he died.

"He had to become a perfect man and yet not lose his continuity of life. His life-force was not to be extinguished but would be transferred to the ovum of the virgin girl, Mary." (Watchtower magazine, 2-15-82, p.7)

So, if it's possible for God to transfer the life force of a dead spirit being into a human body in order to preserve its continuity of life, then I see no reason to question whether God can do the very same thing in reverse; viz: transfer the life force of dead human beings into spirit bodies; thus preserving their continuity of life.

● Heb 12:22-23 . . But you have approached a Mount Zion and a city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem, and myriads of angels, in general assembly, and the congregation of the firstborn who have been enrolled in the heavens, and God the Judge of all, and the spiritual lives of righteous ones who have been made perfect,

The words "spiritual lives" are a construed interpretation of the Greek word pneúmasi which actually means spirits rather than spiritual lives; and is so translated in something like 32 verses in regular Bibles, including, but not limited to, the spirits in prison. (1Pet 3:19)

NOTE: The Watchtower Society's Bible contains quite a few places where Greek words are construed rather than translated. For example Rev 16:13-14 where pneúmasi is said to be "inspired expressions" instead of spirits.
_

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again WeberHome,

.THE BREATH OF LIFE
Creatures within whom is the breath of life are perishable (e.g. Gen 7:21-22) but I have yet to encounter a passage in the Bible clearly stating that the breath of life itself is perishable. In point of fact, I think it is very easy to prove that the human creature's breath of life is not only a permanent feature of their existence; but also prevents them from going out of existence.

Yes, man after he sinned was sentenced to return to dust Genesis 3:19, and there await in the grave until the resurrection. Using figurative language it is stated that he is asleep in the dust of the earth Daniel 12:2-3. The following states that he does not have any consciousness, and this proves that when he breathes his last, the breath goes forth from his body, he expires, and there is no hint that this then becomes his immortal soul, rather the testimony is quite explicit that this is not his immortality:
Psalm 146:2-4 (KJV): 2 While I live will I praise the LORD: I will sing praises unto my God while I have any being. 3 Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. 4 His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
OF MICE AND MEN

● Luke 12:16-20 . . He spoke an illustration to them, saying: The land of a certain rich man produced well. Consequently he began reasoning within himself, saying, "What shall I do, now that I have nowhere to gather my crops?"

. . . So he said, "I will do this: I will tear down my storehouses and build bigger ones, and there I will gather all my grain and all my good things; and I will say to my soul: Soul, you have many good things laid up for many years; take your ease, eat, drink, enjoy yourself."

. . . But God said to him, "Unreasonable one; this night they are demanding your soul from you. Who, then, is to have the things you stored up?"

I suppose there's any number of ways to interpret that illustration; but I am impressed by the fact that man's plan failed to take into account the fragility of life.

● Ps 146:3-4 . . Do not put your trust in nobles, nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs. His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish.

The Hebrew word for "thoughts" in that passage is 'eshtonah (esh-to naw') which means: thinking.

Unfortunately, Ps 146:4 is the only place in the entire Old Testament where 'eshtonah appears so we can't compare its uses in other contexts.

According to Webster's the word "thinking" is ambiguous with quite a variety of meanings to choose from; including, but not limited to: concerns, anticipations, conceptions, opinions, imaginations, visualizations, ideas, epiphanies, plans, schemes, fantasies, arguments, aspirations, deliberations, and the like.

For the rich man in Jesus' illustration; I would choose ideas, plans, and schemes.

For example: consider all those people who perished in the World Trade Center, and in the Japan and Indonesia tsunamis, and the Haiti earthquake. None of them woke that day planning on it being their last on earth. No, on the contrary; they had people to see, places to go, and things to do: but before the day ended; whatever was on their itinerary lost its importance-- their priorities went right out the window and became no more significant than green cheese on the moon.

All their plans, their dreams, their schedules, their appointments, their schemes, their problems, their ambitions, their loves, and their aspirations went right down the tubes as they were suddenly confronted with a whole new reality to cope with.

So then, an alternative to the Watchtower Society's interpretation is that people don't cease to exist when they die nor do their cognitive processes stop working; no, Ps 146:4 only means that whatever was on their minds before they passed away is now null and void.

Take for example Michael Jackson. While working on a new world tour, Jackson died in his sleep. As a result; his tour wrapped on the spot.

When my eldest nephew was paroled from prison, he quit drinking, and began going to college with the goal towards becoming a counselor. For 2½ years all went well. His parole officer was happy, and he was on track and getting good grades. My nephew's future looked assured. And then on the morning of Sept 25, 2015, he dropped dead to the floor of natural causes.

My nephew's passing was a terrible disappointment to everybody; but actually we all kind of expected it. He was grossly overweight, had high blood pressure and high cholesterol, rarely exercised, and smoked. But the point is; my nephew's dream ended just as abruptly as flipping a light switch. And all of our hopes for his success ended the same way.

Death is the mortal enemy of human ambitions. It often casts its long shadow when they set about planning their lives. The Scottish poet Robert Burns noticed that life sometimes throws a curve ball that makes all your careful preparations strike out instead of getting you on base.

He was out one day plowing in the field and uprooted a mouse's underground nest who was all set for the oncoming winter. The mouse had picked a fallow field as the site for its winter retreat thinking it would be safe and snug; unmolested during the cold. But it didn't (or maybe we should say it couldn't) know the workings of powers higher than itself-- in this case, farmers and their machinery.

Mousie, you are not alone in proving foresight may be vain.
The best laid schemes of mice and men go often askew,
And leave us naught but grief and pain for promised joy.
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY

● 1Thess 4:16-17 . .The Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel's voice and with God's trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first.

I'm going to revise a portion of that passage slightly in order to bring out a point.

"with the archangel's voice"

No, it doesn't say the archangel's voice, rather, it says "an" archangel's voice; so I think it would be a mistake to assume that 1Thss 4:16-17 is referring to the archangel Michael spoken of in Jude 1:9 when, in point of fact, according to Dan 10:13, there's more than one archangel.

Archangels are very high ranking, but there is another personage even higher in rank than they spoken of in Josh 5:13-15; a being whose rank is described as captain of Jehovah's forces; and in the captain's presence, Joshua was required to remove his shoes; same as Moses at the burning bush. (Ex 3:1-5)

NOTE: The title "Son of Man" in Matt 24:30-31 alerts us to the fact that the Lord himself spoken of in 1Thess 4:16-17 will be a human being rather than a spirit being.
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
SOLOMON vs JESUS

● 2Tim 3:16 . . All scripture is inspired of God

Followers of Islam claim that the entirety of the Koran was given to Muhammad via word for word voice dictation; but Christians dare not make the same claim for the Old Testament, viz: though it's all inspired, it was not all given via word for word voice dictation.

Bible students are often baffled as to why Solomon's remarks in the book of Ecclesiastes sometimes contradict Jesus' teachings in the New Testament. Well; the answer to that is actually pretty simple.

Solomon wasn't inspired to record his observations from the perspective of an enlightened man who's privy to knowledge beyond the scope of empirical evidence and human experience; rather, from the perspective of a man under the sun; viz: a down to earth thinking man whose perception of reality is moderated by what he can see for himself going on around him in the physical universe; which of course results in an evaluation of life on earth as seen from the earth rather than an evaluation of life on earth as seen from heaven.

In other words: Ecclesiastes is the Bible's book of philosophy-- one man's personal world view --rather than a book of either history or prophecy; and it's loaded with pessimism; which is basically a mindset inclined to dwell on the negative in human experience rather than the positive. For example:

"You only go around once, so do it with all the gusto you can get!"

That was a Schlitz beer advertisement some years ago. It's worldly wisdom thru and thru rather than heavenly. Compare it to a couple of Solomon's remarks:

● Ecc 9:5 . . The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all

● Ecc 9:10 . . All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol, the place to which you are going.

Same wisdom as Schlitz beer wisdom.

Solomon was a very wise man; in point of fact, he was the brightest intellectual of his day. But Solomon's knowledge and experience were limited. He didn't know everything there is to know, nor had he seen everything there is to see, nor been everywhere there is to go.

● Matt 12:42 . .The queen of the south will be raised up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it; because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, but, look! something more than Solomon is here.

In other words; Jesus' wisdom trumps Solomon's.

● John 1:1-3 . . In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. This one was in the beginning with God. All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.

● Col 2:3 . . Carefully concealed in him are all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge.

And Jesus' comes highly recommended too.

● Matt 17:5 . . This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved; listen to him.

So then, when encountering remarks in the book of Ecclesiastes that are out of step with Jesus' teachings in the New Testament, my unsolicited spiritual counseling is: go with "my Son".

● John 8:12 . . I am the light of the world. He that follows me will by no means walk in darkness, but will possess the light of life.
_

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again WeberHome,

.SOLOMON vs JESUS
● 2Tim 3:16 . . All scripture is inspired of God
● Ecc 9:5 . . The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all
● Ecc 9:10 . . All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol, the place to which you are going.

David and Daniel agree with Solomon and all three were inspired:
Psalm 6:4-5 (KJV): 4 Return, O LORD, deliver my soul: oh save me for thy mercies’ sake. 5 For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?
Daniel 12:2-3 (KJV): 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
CHRIST'S PARABLES

Fiction can be defined as stories about people, places, and events that, though untrue; are plausible; viz: realistic.

Fantasy can be defined as stories about people, places, and events that are not only untrue; but implausible; viz: unrealistic.

For example: a story about a wooden boy like Pinocchio is unrealistic; while a story about a boy with autism is realistic. The difference between Pinocchio and the autistic boy is that the one is compatible with normal reality; while the other is far removed from normal reality.

I have yet to read even one of Jesus Christ's parables that could not possibly be a real-life story. They're all actually quite believable-- banquets, stewards, weddings, farmers sowing seed, pearls, lost sheep, fish nets, women losing coins, sons leaving home, wineskins bursting, tares among the wheat, leavened bread, barren fig trees, the blind leading the blind, et al.

Now; if Christ had told one that alleged the moon was made of green cheese; we would have good reason to believe that at least that one was fantasy; but none of them are like that. No; there's nothing out of the ordinary in his parables. At best; Christ's parables might qualify as fiction; but never fantasy because none of them are so far removed from the normal round of human experience that they have no basis in reality whatsoever.

Luke 16:19-31 is commonly alleged to be a parable; which of course implies that the story is fiction; and some would even say fantasy. But the parable theory has a fatal flaw. Abraham is not a fictional character: he's a real-life man; the father of the Hebrew people, held in very high esteem by at least three of the world's prominent religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. And he's also the friend of God (Isa 41:8). I simply cannot believe that Jesus Christ-- a man famous among normal Christians for his honesty and integrity --would say something untrue about a famous real-life man; especially about one of his Father's buddies.

And on top of that, the story quotes Abraham a number of times. Well; if the story is fiction, then Jesus Christ is on record testifying that Abraham said things that he didn't really say; which is a clear violation of the commandment that prohibits bearing false witness.

There is something else to consider.

The story of the rich man and Lazarus didn't originate with Jesus Christ. No, it originated with his Father. In other words: Jesus Christ was micro-managed.

● John 3:34 . . He is sent by God. He speaks God's words

● John 8:26 . . He that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of Him.

● John 8:28 . . I do nothing on my own initiative, but I speak these things as the Father taught me.

● John 12:49 . . I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, He gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

● John 14:24 . .The word which you hear is not mine, but the Father's who sent me. So, by alleging that Luke 16:19-31 is fiction/fantasy, the parable theory slanders God by insinuating that He's a person of marginal integrity who can't be trusted to tell the truth about people, not even about His own friends, which is ridiculous seeing as how Titus 1:2 and Heb 6:18 testify that God cannot lie.

God's impeccable character is what makes that narrative all the more terrifying. Unless somebody can prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Christ's Father is a tale-spinner; I pretty much have to assume the narrative was drawn from real-life; and if not drawn from real life, then at least based upon real life.

In other words: there really is an afterlife place of conscious suffering where people endure unbearable anxiety worrying their loved ones are on a road to where they are and there is no way to warn them; similar to the survivors of the Titanic watching their loved ones go to Davy Jones while utterly helpless to do anything about it.

People for whom I feel the most pity are parents that brought up their children in a religion whose pot at the end of the rainbow is filled with molten sulfur rather than gold. How do people bear up under something like that on their conscience?
_

 

[WeberHome]

Re: Analyzing Jehovah's Witness Teachings

.
MISSIONARIES AT YOUR DOOR

Should you decide to go head to head with Watchtower Society missionaries, here's some useful tips passed on by Pete, the ex Jehovah's Witness mentioned at the first.

1• Round up a copy of the Watchtower Society's New World Translation of the Bible, and its Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures. Sometimes these are available in thrift stores like Good Will and Salvation Army. Both are available online from amazon dot com.

For some useful insights into a variety of Jehovah's Witness teachings, the little brown book titled Reasoning From The Scriptures is a must-have. It's available online too. Be sure to get the Watchtower Society's version instead of another book by the same name authored by a different agency.

2• Do not let these people get personal with you. You must never ever assume they are your friends because first and foremost their primary interest is in making you a life-long slave to the Watchtower Society. You can be courteous and you can be civil, but it's highly recommended that you not let them into your life.

3• Do not accept their literature. They will want to come back later and discuss it with you; thus taking control of both your thinking and the meeting.

4• Don't let them get too far into their spiel, but at the first opportunity begin introducing your own questions; thus denying them control of the conversation.

5• Do not debate. You're not a salesman pushing a product, nor a recruiter, nor a candidate running for an elected office: you're not on a quota, you're not out to win anything, nor are you required to win-- you're a herald; viz: a messenger. Your information is best presented as a second opinion for them to think about; and that's all. No hammering and no pressuring.

The goal is to show missionaries that the Society's isn't the only expert opinion out there. In other words: the Watchtower Society's interpretations aren't the only option; nor are theirs eo ipso the right interpretations just because the Governing Body says so.

6• Avoid getting embroiled in trivial issues like birthdays, Easter, Christmas, Christmas trees, the design and construction of the wooden device upon which Christ was crucified, saluting the flag, service in the military, and that sort of thing. There are much bigger fish to fry than those.

The No.1 issue on their minds when they come to your door will likely be Jehovah's kingdom, in particular, the portion of His kingdom to be on Earth.

7• Make them to listen and pay attention to what you say even if you have to repeat yourself to do it, or clap your hands, snap your fingers, or raise your voice. Do not let them digress, change the subject, go off on a tangent, nor get distracted and/or turn their attention elsewhere while you're speaking. If they start digging through their bags, shuffling papers, tinkering with their tablets, or looking up a reference; call them on it because there is no use in speaking when their minds are elsewhere occupied.

8• Do not permit them to interrupt you and/or talk out of turn. Politely, but firmly, insist that they hold their peace while you speak your piece.

9• Do not permit them to evade and/or circumvent difficult questions. They sometimes say that they will have to confer with someone more knowledgeable. When they do that, the meeting is over. Thank them politely for their time and then ask them to leave and come back when they have the information. Do not let them stay and start a new topic of their own.

10• Do not react and/or respond to ad hominems, which can be defined as a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

11• These people undergo hour upon hour of training to refute standard Christian doctrines, so it's very important to show them the Bible not in ways they've already seen, but in ways they've never imagined.
_

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again WeberHome,

.CHRIST'S PARABLES
Luke 16:19-31 is commonly alleged to be a parable; which of course implies that the story is fiction; and some would even say fantasy. But the parable theory has a fatal flaw. Abraham is not a fictional character: he's a real-life man; the father of the Hebrew people, held in very high esteem by at least three of the world's prominent religions:
In other words: there really is an afterlife place of conscious suffering where people endure unbearable anxiety worrying their loved ones are on a road to where they are and there is no way to warn them; similar to the survivors of the Titanic watching their loved ones go to Davy Jones while utterly helpless to do anything about it.

Yes, I believe that the Rich Man and Lazarus is a parable based upon the wrong beliefs of the Pharisees and the parable is also a parody of their beliefs. Jesus used this framework to call out the covetousness of the Pharisees. But Jesus not only names Abraham, he also names Lazarus and resurrection and the fact that even if one rose from the dead, the Pharisees would not repent. Soon after this Lazarus was raised from the dead, and as a direct result the Sadducees and Pharisees did not repent, but this precipitated their decision to not only kill Jesus, but also Lazarus. The teaching of the Bible and Gospel is the mortality of man and the resurrection and reward of the faithful and the return to dust of the unfaithful, and a Just and Merciful God, not eternal torments of the majority of mankind.

Kind regards
Trevor