Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 88

Thread: The Watch Tower Society vs Christianity

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 188
    Blog Entries
    270

    Post Re: The Watch Tower Society vs Christianity

    -
    Depending upon one's translation of choice; Jesus Christ is described in John 1:14, John 1:18, John 3:16, and John 3:18, as the only-begotten god and/or the only-begotten son of God. Either way, the koiné Greek word for "only begotten" is monogenes (mon-og-en-ace') which is a combination of two words.

    The first is mono, which music buffs recognize as a single channel rather than two or four in surround sound stereo. Mono is very common; e.g. monogamy, monofilament, monotonous, mononucleotide, monochrome, monogram, monolith, monologue, monomial, et al.

    The other word is genes; from whence we get the English word gene; which Webster's defines as a biological term indicating a part of a cell that controls or influences the appearance, growth, etc., of a living thing. In other words: monogenes refers to one biological gene set rather than many.

    Monogenes always, and without exception, refers to a parent's sole biological child in the New Testament. If a parent has two or three biological children, none of them qualify as monogenes because in order to qualify as a monogenes child, the child has to be an only child. Obviously then, an adopted child can never be monogenes in the home because it wouldn't be the home's biological child. Examples of monogenes children are located at Luke 7:12, Luke 8:42, and Luke 9:38.

    OBJECTION: I would submit that the monogenes is also used in the context of "one of a kind" viz: a child who is unequalled when compared to others. For example, it is found in Hebrew 11:17 of Isaac being Abraham's "only begotten son." But Isaac's older brother Ishmael was also Abraham's biological son.

    RESPONSE: The objector's objection isn't a translation, rather, it's an interpretation.

    To start with, three New Testament examples of monogenes are located at Luke 7:12, Luke 8:42, and Luke 9:38, and in all three examples it refers not to a special child, but to a parent's sole biological child.

    Next I'll go to the Old Testament.

    The common laws of Abraham's day (e.g. the Code of Hammurabi and the laws of Lipit-Ishtar) entitled Ishmael to the lion's share of Abraham's estate because he was Abraham's firstborn son. However, there was a clause in the laws stipulating that if a slave-owner emancipated his child's in-slavery biological mother; then the mother and the child would lose any and all claims to a paternal property settlement with the slave-owner.

    The trick is: Abraham couldn't just send Hagar packing, nor sell her, for the clause to take effect; no, he had to emancipate her; which he did.

    †. Gen 21:14 . . So Abraham got up early in the morning and took bread and a skin water bottle and gave it to Hagar, setting it upon her shoulder, and the child, and then dismissed her.

    The phrase "dismissed her" is from the Hebrew word shalach (shaw-lakh') which is a word used of divorce as well as for the emancipation of slaves. In other words: Hagar wasn't banished as is commonly assumed; no, she was set free; and it's very important to nail that down in our thinking because if Abraham had merely banished Hagar, then her son Ishmael would have retained his legal status as Abraham's eldest biological son.

    Later, when Abraham was ordered to sacrifice Isaac; God referred to him as the patriarch's only son.

    †. Gen 22:2 . .Take now your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah; and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell you.

    †. Gen 22:12 . . Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.

    Technically, Ishmael retained his status as one of Abraham's biological sons (Gen 25:9) but not legally; no, his legal association with Abraham was dissolved when he emancipated Ishmael's mother; and I sincerely believe that is precisely how Gen 22:2, Gen 22:12, and Heb 11:17 ought to be understood.

    But aside from all that: if the Word of John 1:14, John 1:18, John 3:16, and John 3:18 is really and truly God's biological offspring (so to speak) then the Watch Tower Society has a serious problem with its Christology; because if God were to reproduce He would give birth to God; viz: more of Himself; just was when humans reproduce they give birth to humans; viz: more of themselves.

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 188
    Blog Entries
    270

    Post Re: The Watch Tower Society vs Christianity

    -
    On page 1129 of the Watchtower publication Aid To Bible Understanding; a mediator is defined as one who interposes between two parties at variance to reconcile them: an intercessor.

    Here's a question that someone wrote in to the "Questions From Readers" section of the April 01, 1976 issue of Watch Tower magazine, asking:

    "Is Jesus the mediator only for anointed Christians? (a.k.a. the 144,000)

    The answer given in the magazine is YES.

    The magazine's answer is corroborated on page 1130 of Aid To Bible Understanding where it says that the 144,000 are the only ones who have the mediator; a.k.a. Jesus Christ. (1John 2:1)

    Intercession for the earthly class— the hewers of wood and the haulers of water, a.k.a. the great crowd —is accomplished on the coattails of the 144,000 anointed Witnesses; viz: Jesus Christ is an indirect, second party mediator for the rank and file via the kindly patronage of the Watchtower Society.

    It's sort of like buying insurance from Allstate. The company doesn't sell direct; its business is conducted through brokers. In essence, that's what the Society presumes itself: Jesus Christ's brokerage.

    So then; when a member of the earthly class either defects or is dis-fellowshipped, it breaks the pipeline to the mediator that he enjoyed within the Society's fold; and he right quick loses all contact with God; and finds himself in grave danger of the Tribulation.

    Bottom line: According to Watch Tower Society theology; it is impossible for non-anointed people to be on peaceful terms with God apart from affiliation with the Society's anointed class, a.k.a. the faithful and wise steward.

    In other words: Christ's mediation as per 1Tim 2:5 is accomplished via a hierarchy that begins with Christ's association with the anointed class; and from thence to the rest of humanity. Removing the anointed class from the chain of command; cuts humanity off from Christ.

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

  3. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 188
    Blog Entries
    270

    Post Re: The Watch Tower Society vs Christianity

    -
    Were you to ask John Q. and/or Jane Doe Watchtower Society missionary if they believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, I can assure you they would answer in the affirmative. However, what you may not know is that you and they would not be on the same page as the conversation would be talking about two very different processes that go by the same name. In other words: you would find yourself thrown off by semantic double speak.

    The standard Christian understanding of Christ's resurrection is common throughout the gospels; viz: Jesus Christ died as a physical human being and he came back as a physical human being.

    Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha) didn't believe in that kind of return to life. He taught reincarnation; which is very different because it doesn't eo ipso indicate people coming back as human beings, nor as even as themselves; but rather, as rearranged karma; which means Buddhists could conceivably come back as someone else, and even a different gender: or a sea urchin, or a termite, or a fruit bat.

    The Watchtower Society's resurrection theory is just as loopy as Siddhartha's. According to its proprietary way of seeing things; Christ didn't physically rise from the dead at all; and here's why.

    In Watch Tower Society theology, an angel named Michael volunteered to come to the earth to die for humanity's sins. But in order to do so; he had to relinquish his angel existence to become a human being seeing as how in Society theology it is impossible for someone to exist as a spirit being and a human being simultaneously. Thus when Michael's so-called "life force" was transferred to flesh and given the name Jesus; he became not only a different species of life, but a whole other person too; viz: except for his so called "life force" Michael the angel went completely out of existence.

    But Michael's existence as a human being was only temporary. When God "raised" Jesus from the dead, it was not Jesus who got raised from the dead; it was Michael. Seeing as how Michael the angel had gone completely out of existence when he became Jesus the human being; God had to re-create Michael the angel from memory; in other words: in Society theology, there has actually been two Michaels.

    There is a really, really big hole in the Society's theology; and that's the dead man's corpse. In order to confirm that Jesus stayed dead, the Society is going to have produce his remains. A piece of evidence of that significance can't be allowed to just slip through a crack unnoticed as if it makes no difference

    †. Acts 1:1-3 . .The first account, O Theophilus, I composed about all the things Jesus started both to do and to teach, until the day that he was taken up, after he had given commandment through holy spirit to the apostles whom he chose. To these also by many positive proofs he showed himself alive after he had suffered.

    Did the human Jesus really show himself alive by many positive proofs after he had suffered? Not according to the Watch Tower Society. In their theology, Michael the angel showed himself alive by means of a materialized body that resembled the human Jesus in every way-- nail prints and spear wound to boot --because the human Jesus had to stay dead in order for Michael to regain his angel existence.

    There are some seriously fatal flaws in that theory.

    1• The New Testament never even one time, on any occasion, nor under any circumstances, nor in any situation, either attests, alleges, alludes, or states that an angel named Michael appeared in Christ's human form cloaked in a materialized body.

    2• Michael the angel never once identities himself as Michael the angel when allegedly appearing in a materialized body.

    3• Passing one's self off in the guise of a dead man is the lowest form of identity theft imaginable. People do it all the time; and it's what I expect from human beings, but that is not the kind of behavior I have a right to expect from an arch angel.

    4• A so-called materialized body is not a real person; it's an avatar.

    5• Neither Paul, nor Peter, nor John, nor James, nor Jude, ever even one single time in any of their writings correlate Jesus Christ with Michael the angel: not once. You'd think that if Michael the angel was Jesus Christ, that those men would have said so because that would be a really big deal.

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 188
    Blog Entries
    270

    Post Re: The Watch Tower Society vs Christianity

    -
    OBJECTION: How can you totally side-step the fact that Jesus suddenly appeared to the Apostles after they had locked a door? If the human Jesus was raised in a real human body, how could he go through a locked door?

    RESPONSE: There's just no excuse for an objection like that one. Have we already forgotten how the human Christ walked on water, restored withered limbs, cured blindness, healed serious diseases like leprosy, revived the dead, controlled the weather, multiplied fish and bread, turned water into wine, and levitated? What's one more miracle, more or less? Walking through walls? Disappearing? How hard could either of those two feats really be for a man with the powers of God at his disposal?

    Too many people want Christianity to be a reasonable religion. It's not. Christianity is a supernatural religion.

    It perplexes me sometimes how it is that people can say they believe in miracles but yet cannot believe that God can make a physical human body pass through a closed and locked door. Well; if they can understand how Daniel's three friends survived totally unscathed inside a superheated fiery furnace, then they'll understand how a physical human body can pass through a closed and locked door. It's just downright shameful that folk daring to call themselves Jehovah's witnesses bear false witness about His power over the laws of nature.

    OBJECTION: Well; if Jehovah has enough power over the laws of physics to pass a physical human body through closed and locked doors, then couldn't He pass Michael through the door as a spirit and then materialize him on the other side as a human in order to communicate with his friends?

    RESPONSE: That would be acceptable if only there were some record of it in the New Testament. But it is an irrefutable fact that the New Testament not even one time, on any occasion, nor under any circumstances, nor in any situation, either attests, alleges, alludes, or states that an angel named Michael appeared to Christ's friends cloaked in a human avatar. That doctrine doesn't come from the New Testament. It's a humanistic fantasy.

    OBJECTION: Angels in the Old Testament appeared to men in materialized bodies; for example the three men who visited Abraham in the 18th chapter of Genesis.

    RESPONSE: Beware of making the mistake of assuming that the appearance of angels in human form in the Old Testament validates the Society's theory that one named Michael did the very same thing in the New.

    It is an irrefutable fact that the New Testament never even one time, on any occasion, nor under any circumstances, nor in any situation, either attests, alleges, alludes, or states that an angel named Michael appeared to Christ's friends cloaked in a human avatar. That doctrine doesn't come from the New Testament. It's a humanistic fantasy.

    It's commonly assumed that the two men identified as angels who showed up at the gate of Sodom were two of the men who visited Abraham. But even so; the Old Testament word for "angel" is mal'ak (mal-awk') which should never be taken to eo ipso indicate celestial beings. The word simply means a dispatched deputy; viz: a messenger; either human or celestial. For example:

    †. Gen 32:3-4 . . Then Jacob sent messengers ahead of him to Esau his brother to the land of Seir, the field of Edom, and he commanded them, saying: "yada, yada, yada"

    The Hebrew word for the ordinary human messengers in that verse is mal'ak. Here's another example:

    †. Gen 32:6 . . In time the messengers returned to Jacob, saying: "yada, yada, yada".

    Here's another example where mal'ak indicates ordinary human beings rather than celestial beings.

    †. Num 20:14 . . Subsequently Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom: "This is what your brother Israel has said: "yada, yada, yada."

    And another:

    †. Gen 6:17 . . Only Rahab the prostitute may keep on living, she and all who are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers whom we sent out.

    And another:

    †. Mal 2:7 . . For the lips of a priest should preserve knowledge, and men should seek instruction from his mouth; for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts.

    There are dozens of examples in the Old Testament where the word mal'ak indicates ordinary human beings instead of celestial beings. Bottom line is: the 18th and 19th chapters of Genesis are useless for confirming beyond a shadow of doubt that an angel named Michael appeared to Christ's friends cloaked in a materialized human body; viz: an avatar.

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 188
    Blog Entries
    270

    Post Re: The Watch Tower Society vs Christianity

    -
    ALLEGATION: People who criticize Jehovah's Witnesses are unloving!

    RESPONSE: A complaint like that one is what's known as an ad hominem; which Webster's defines as an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made.

    Ad hominems are typically emotional and reactive rather than rational and objective. And they're oftentimes red herrings; which Webster's defines as something unimportant that is used to stop people from noticing or thinking about something important.

    I've encountered ad hominem behavior not only among Jehovah's Witnesses, but also among Rome's followers who perceive that any and all opposition to Rome's beliefs and practices is motivated by hatred for Catholics. That's just rabid fanaticism, through and through.

    But anyway; the Watch Tower Society is such a hypocrite. It flaps its lips about love; while in its heart longing for the day when every non Jehovah's Witness on earth is slain and they have the whole globe to themselves.

    Let's say that 12/30/2015 is that day. Well; the world population to that date, as of 10:08 am EST, was estimated to be 7,295,550,588 people, while the world's number of Jehovah's Witnesses was estimated at 8,200,000; meaning that if the slaughter began on that date, something like 7,287,350,588 people would lose their lives in order to make the world a safer place for the Watch Tower Society.

    That's 7.287+ Billion people who would all be slain for the sake of Charles Taze Russell and Joseph Franklin Rutherford; in contrast to the mere 9 people who lost their lives because of Charles Manson.

    To put that number of people in perspective; let's say that the average height of the slain is three feet. Well, 7,287,350,588 people that height laid head to toe would stretch out to 4,140,540 statute miles. Ergo: the slain would circle the globe roughly 166 times; which is about equal to eight round trips to the Moon at its average distance from Earth.

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

  6. #76
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 188
    Blog Entries
    270

    Post Re: The Watch Tower Society vs Christianity

    -
    One of the Watch Tower Society's rather curious claims is located on page 237 of the April 15, 1963 issue of the Watch Tower magazine; which reads: "If Jesus were to take his body of flesh, blood, and bones to heaven and enjoy them there, what would this mean? It would mean that there would be no resurrection of the dead for anybody. Why not? Because Jesus would be taking his sacrifice off God's altar."

    I'm a fan of a very bright woman named Marilyn vos Savant. She pens a weekly column in the Sunday paper's Parade Magazine. Her tested IQ is somewhere in the 200 range. Marilyn received a question that goes like this:

    QUESTION: Our family has been arguing about this: If a person makes a statement, and another person challenges it; who has the burden of proof?

    MARILYN'S ANSWER: Usually the person who makes an affirmative statement (defined as a statement that asserts a fact, makes an allegation, or favors an action; etc) has the burden of proof. America's justice system is an example. The prosecution (or the plaintiff, as the case may be) rather than the defense, must prove its case to the jury. Failure to prove it's case, requires that the defense be exonerated.

    In other words: when the Society makes a claim like the one on page 237 of the April 15, 1963 issue of the Watch Tower magazine; it has a moral obligation to substantiate it because it is not incumbent upon the Society's opponents to prove its claims are false; no, it is incumbent upon the Society to prove it's claims are true; and they should never be given a green light to do it with humanistic reasoning, semantic double speak, and/or clever sophistry; no, they have to show it not only from scripture, but also in scripture. If their claim cannot be shown from scripture, and in scripture, then rational jurisprudence demands their claim be thrown out of court as spurious fiction.

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

  7. #77
    Wow, another repeated spam thread from another forum! Do you ever get tired of all the cut and pasting you do?

    Lcash

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 188
    Blog Entries
    270

    Post Re: The Watch Tower Society vs Christianity

    -
    So-called Replacement Theology is just another name for identity theft. Take for example the Watchtower Society's interpretation of Rev 14:1-3 wherein is listed a specific number of Hebrews taken from every tribe of the sons of Israel.

    The Society alleges that those aren't biological sons of Israel; but rather "spiritual" sons-- referring of course to the Society's elite cadre of 144,000 Witnesses who have supposedly undergone a spirit birth as per Christ's instruction at John 3:3-8; and the anointing as per 1John 2:26-27.

    The Society's allegation is premised upon its observation that there never was a tribe of Joseph; when in reality Joseph is listed as both a son and a tribe at Gen 49:2-28, and as a tribe at Ezek 48:31-34. So that portion of the Society's reasoning is clearly a false premise.

    The Society's allegation is also premised upon its observation that Ephraim and Dan are missing from the list of tribes at Rev 7:4-8. However, what the Society's theologians have somehow overlooked in the Old Testament is that it doesn't matter whose names are chosen to represent the twelve tribes of Israel just so long as there are twelve names. Are there twelve in Rev 7:4- 8? Yes. Well then that's good enough. I realize that makes no sense but then the Lord's apostles were still referred to as "the twelve" even with Judas out of the picture. So that premise in the Society's reasoning is spurious too.

    The Society's allegation is also premised upon its reasoning that Levi isn't a valid tribe based upon the fact that the Levites are exempt from warfare. However, Levi is clearly listed as both a son and a tribe along with Joseph at Gen 49:2-28. Levi is also listed as a tribe at Ezek 48:31-34; which is a good many years after Num 1:1-54. So that premise is bogus too.

    The Watchtower Society not wanting the 144,000 to be biological Hebrews is one thing; but I would just like to know from whence Charles T. Russell's and Joseph F. Rutherford's followers got the idea that their people are the 144,000. That's a pretty serious claim. How do they validate it? I don't know; but I can just about guarantee that their explanation is an outlandish stretch of the imagination consisting of humanistic reasoning, rationalizing, clever sophistry, and semantic double-speak.

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

  9. #79
    Senior Member Cardinal TT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    6,677
    Thanked: 4671
    Blog Entries
    2

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 188
    Blog Entries
    270

    Post

    -
    Roughly translated into English, Arbeit Macht Frei means: Work Makes Free

    That slogan was placed above the entrance to several Nazi camps like Auschwitz and Dachau; but of course the only freedom that work obtained for inmates was death; either by disease, starvation, or execution.

    At the Buchenwald camp the slogan Jedem das Seine was used; which means, literally: "to each his own" but idiomatically it means: Everyone gets what he deserves. But again, their just deserts were typically the same as those of Dachau and Auschwitz.

    Bear with me because I do have a point to make with those grim reminders.

    †. Rom 2:6-11 . . And he will render to each one according to his works: everlasting life to those who are seeking glory and honor and incorruptibleness by endurance in work that is good; however, for those who are contentious and who disobey the truth but obey unrighteousness there will be wrath and anger, tribulation and distress, upon the soul of every man who works what is injurious, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory and honor and peace for everyone who works what is good, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.

    †. Php 2:12 . . Consequently, my beloved ones, in the way that you have always obeyed, not during my presence only, but now much more readily during my absence, keep working out your own salvation with fear and trembling

    If those were the only teachings in the Bible related to escaping the wrath of God; I think I could safely say, without hesitation, and without reservation: everyone is lost-- just as hopelessly lost as the poor misfortunate at Dachau, Auschwitz, and Buchenwald because just as they could never work enough to satisfy the Nazis; so nobody can ever work enough to satisfy God; let alone enough to satisfy the Watch Tower Society.

    †. Luke 17:7-10 . .Who of you is there that has a slave plowing or minding the flock who will say to him when he gets in from the field: Come here at once and recline at the table. Rather, will he not say to him: Get something ready for me to have my evening meal, and put on an apron and minister to me until I am through eating and drinking, and afterward you can eat and drink.

    . . . He will not feel gratitude to the slave because he did the things assigned, will he? So you, also, when you have done all the things assigned to you, say: We are good-for-nothing slaves. What we have done is what we ought to have done.

    †. Rom 3:12 . . All men have deflected, all of them together have become worthless

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
You can avoid repair bills with an extended service plan for your Jeep. Many vehicle repairs can cost thousands of dollars in unexpected expense, now may be the time to consider an extended service plan for your vehicle.