JW organization.

[Elijah John]

Jehovah's Witnesses are not allowed to:

-vote
-celebrate birthdays
-celebrate Christmas or Easter
-donate or receive blood transfusions.

And if any JW openly persists in doing these things[edit to add publicly], they will be shunned or disfellowshipped, [edit to add or otherwise admonished or disciplined.]

For debate,

1) what do any of these check-list prohibitions have to do with Christianity?

2) And are any of these prohibitions compatible with the idea of Christian freedom?

3) Are these prohibitions arbitrary or legalistic?

4) And could Jehvoah's Witness as an organization flourish without these particular prohibitions and still honor God?

Please address any or all of the above.

[McCulloch]

Well what else would be "God's Word"?

I don't know. Jesus didn't specify. Maybe the Ten Words (Ten Commandments). Maybe the direct revelations he got from God. Maybe the Tanakh. Maybe it included the oral Torah. I don't know and neither do you.

Isn't that what we call the Bible?

Yes, that is what Christians now call the Bible. It would be an anachronism to assume without evidence that this is how early first century Jews referred to the Tanakh.

[onewithhim]

For every detail that the writers of the Bible got right against what might have been known at the time...

What do you mean by this? Are you suggesting that there are indeed details that the bible writers "got something right" despite the constraints of the knowledge of their day? Can you provide evidence of this? It seems to me you are contrasting what they got right with what they got wrong, please prove your the premise by providing evidence of what they got right.

JW

I don't understand your objection. You provided a list of what the Biblical writers got right.

• the bible describes the earth as a "globe" (sphere) that is suspended in space at a time when it was generally believe that the earth was flat and must have had visible means of support
• earth's water cycle,
• laws of quarantine

I can, if you wish, provide a list of what they got wrong

• the order of creation
• describing the Sky as a Solid Dome Containing Windows
• disease caused by demons not microorganisms

There is so much in the Bible that is pure poetic license. Going down to their forefathers as if it was family reunion---when it was merely the case of a person dying and being buried, just like the forefathers (I Chronicles 17:11). Trees clapping as if they had hands, and mountains being "cheerful" (Isaiah 55:12). The moon turning into blood (Joel 2:31). Death "ruling" as if it were a person (Romans 5:21). There are many many examples of "poetic license" throughout the Scriptures. It is a silly person who takes those things as real.

That "solid dome" sky you mention would be another example of poetic license. The same when a scripture mentions the "four corners of the earth." Journalists and authors of books use that term even today, knowing full well that its readers would not take it literally.

When Jesus walked the earth there WERE many instances of people being influenced by demons, and the situations are addressed by Jesus who made the demons come out of the people. This happens even today, and the RCC has particular people assigned to try and get the demons out of persons who seem to be incapacitated by them. I don't agree with the RCC on most things, but at least they recognize the reality of demonic possession.

I have always thought that the Bible was correct on the order of creation. How is it different from what science says?

[onewithhim]

Some of the authors of the Bible claim to be speaking for God. Others do not. There are no claims in the Bible about the Bible itself.

If the all knowing all powerful creator of the universe really wanted to communicate to humanity, he would not have to announce it. He could make it self evident.

1)I just got done reading Isaiah and Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Throughout, they all showed the prophets telling their readers what God said to them. "The utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah is:" is everywhere. The claims of the prophets were that they were writing down God's pronouncements to them. Is that not what could be considered claims about the Bible itself?

2)How do you think that God could make his communication "self evident"?

[tam]

May you both have peace!

Jesus called the Hebrew Scriptures God's Word, and "truth." (John 17:17)

Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.

Jesus does no such thing. He claims that God's word is truth. What Jesus does not do is to specify what he means by God's word.

You are correct that He does not specify in this passage that the Hebrew Scriptures are God's word and truth. Indeed, nowhere does He ever state that, and for good reason. Because while He does not specify in that passage what He means by God's word, as you have written, He (and another) does specify in other passages:

"I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6


The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John 1:14




Christ is also the One who sanctifies us, yes? The Hebrew scriptures cannot and do not sanctify us, do not purify us, do not make us clean. They can't even make us believers or even draw us to Christ (as is written: no one comes to the Son unless the Father draws them). They do, however, point to the One who does make us clean:

"...and the blood of [Jesus], his Son, purifies us from all sin. 1John 1:7

they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Rev 7:14

Then He took the cup, gave thanks and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.


And from Ephesians:

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her, to sanctify her...


Christ is the One who sanctifies her.

... cleansing her by the washing with water through the word,


That water being holy spirit (the water of life - holy spirit) which the Father has given to the Son without end; and which the Son (the Word) gives to US.


... and to present her to Himself as a glorious church, without stain or wrinkle or any such blemish, but holy and blameless.…


Holy and blameless, as Christ has made her. Not the Hebrew scriptures. Christ Himself.



Even His name "Jaheshua" means "JAH saves/Savior of JAH".


He is the Word of God.
He is the Truth.
He is the One who sanctifies us.



Peace again to you both and to your households,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 363 by tam]

Yes, I agree.

Mostly.

Jesus said that "Your Word is truth," and I'm sure that included the Hebrew Scriptures from which he quoted continually, as well as himself and what he said (being "the Word" of John's Gospel). He stated that what he said was what the Father told him to say (John 12:49,50). Therefore we can understand that he spoke the Father's words.

1) The Father inspired what was said in the Hebrew Scriptures.

2) The Father commanded Jesus to say certain things.

Both are considered the Father's "Word." The Hebrew Scriptures agree with what Jesus said and vice versa. We cannot argue that those Scriptures are insignificant, nor can we argue that "Your Word," as Jesus put it, would not include the written Hebrew Scriptures.

[polonius]

Jehovah's Witness posted:

It (the Bible) records history before it has happened. The bible records historical détails and events long before (in some cases hundreds of years) before they happened. This presents its most convincing evidence of Divine authorship since humans do not have the ability to see into the future.

RESPONSE: Perhaps that is because such passages were written long after the events they describe.

For example, it is now recognized that the first seven books of the Bible were written between 800 and 700 BC describing the Hebrews "captivity" in Egypt and their "Exodus."

Modern archaeological writing (particularly those associated with Tel Aviv University see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_Unearthed)
tell us that that the Hebrews were never in Egypt and the Exodus (supposedly involving more than 2 million Jews (one quarter or the number supposedly in Egypt) never happened.

But it made for a great movie!

[JehovahsWitness]

Jehovah's Witness posted:

It (the Bible) records history before it has happened. The bible records historical détails and events long before (in some cases hundreds of years) before they happened. This presents its most convincing evidence of Divine authorship since humans do not have the ability to see into the future.

RESPONSE: Perhaps that is because such passages were written long after the events they describe.

For example, it is now recognized that the first seven books of the Bible were written between 800 and 700 BC describing the Hebrews "captivity" in Egypt and their "Exodus."

Modern archaeological writing (particularly those associated with Tel Aviv University see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_Unearthed)
tell us that that the Hebrews were never in Egypt and the Exodus (supposedly involving more than 2 million Jews (one quarter or the number supposedly in Egypt) never happened.

But it made for a great movie!

Are you suggesting that the above is universally accepted, proven fact?
https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/why ... -1.5440969

Are you suggesting that there are no bible prophecies that that were fulfilled after 7th century BCE?

[polonius]

Jehovah's Witness posted:

It (the Bible) records history before it has happened. The bible records historical détails and events long before (in some cases hundreds of years) before they happened. This presents its most convincing evidence of Divine authorship since humans do not have the ability to see into the future.

RESPONSE: Perhaps that is because such passages were written long after the events they describe.

For example, it is now recognized that the first seven books of the Bible were written between 800 and 700 BC describing the Hebrews "captivity" in Egypt and their "Exodus."

Modern archaeological writing (particularly those associated with Tel Aviv University see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_Unearthed)
tell us that that the Hebrews were never in Egypt and the Exodus (supposedly involving more than 2 million Jews (one quarter or the number supposedly in Egypt) never happened.

But it made for a great movie!

Are you suggesting that the above is universally accepted, proven fact?
https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/why ... -1.5440969

Are you suggesting that there are no bible prophecies that that were fulfilled after 7th century BCE?

RESPONSE:

From the first reference you cited. Did you read it before you did?

“The oldest Hebrew manuscripts discovered to date are the Dead Sea Scrolls. Some of the scrolls date back to the 2nd and 3rd centuries B.C.E., well into the Second Temple period. A few earlier Hebraic inscriptions, mainly on stone and pottery shards, have been found, but no extensive manuscripts have survived.
“Yet many scholars are convinced that at least parts of the Bible had been written down hundreds of years earlier, by the 8th or 7th century B.C.E. — or even earlier. We just don't have any evidence because of the medium the ancient scribes used.�

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes ... bible.html
The Bible Unearthed

Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts
By ISRAEL FINKELSTEIN and NEIL ASHER SILBERMAN
Free Press

'The first question was whether Moses could really have been the author of the Five Books of Moses, since the last book, Deuteronomy, described in great detail the precise time and circumstances of Moses' own death. Other incongruities soon became apparent: the biblical text was filled with literary asides, explaining the ancient names of certain places and frequently noting that the evidences of famous biblical events were still visible "to this day." These factors convinced some seventeenth century scholars that the Bible's first five books, at least, had been shaped, expanded, and embellished by later, anonymous editors and revisers over the centuries.''

[polonius]

Jehovah's Witness posted:

It (the Bible) records history before it has happened. The bible records historical détails and events long before (in some cases hundreds of years) before they happened. This presents its most convincing evidence of Divine authorship since humans do not have the ability to see into the future.

RESPONSE: Perhaps that is because such passages were written long after the events they describe.

For example, it is now recognized that the first seven books of the Bible were written between 800 and 700 BC describing the Hebrews "captivity" in Egypt and their "Exodus."

Modern archaeological writing (particularly those associated with Tel Aviv University see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_Unearthed)
tell us that that the Hebrews were never in Egypt and the Exodus (supposedly involving more than 2 million Jews (one quarter or the number supposedly in Egypt) never happened.

But it made for a great movie!

Are you suggesting that the above is universally accepted, proven fact?
https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/why ... -1.5440969

Are you suggesting that there are no bible prophecies that that were fulfilled after 7th century BCE?

RESPONSE:

From the reference you cited. Did you read it before you did?

“The oldest Hebrew manuscripts discovered to date are the Dead Sea Scrolls. Some of the scrolls date back to the 2nd and 3rd centuries B.C.E., well into the Second Temple period. A few earlier Hebraic inscriptions, mainly on stone and pottery shards, have been found, but no extensive manuscripts have survived.

“Yet many scholars are convinced that at least parts of the Bible had been written down hundreds of years earlier, by the 8th or 7th century B.C.E. — or even earlier. We just don't have any evidence because of the medium the ancient scribes used.�

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes ... bible.html

The Bible Unearthed
Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts
By ISRAEL FINKELSTEIN and NEIL ASHER SILBERMAN
Free Press

The first question was whether Moses could really have been the author of the Five Books of Moses, since the last book, Deuteronomy, described in great detail the precise time and circumstances of Moses' own death. Other incongruities soon became apparent: the biblical text was filled with literary asides, explaining the ancient names of certain places and frequently noting that the evidences of famous biblical events were still visible "to this day." These factors convinced some seventeenth century scholars that the Bible's first five books, at least, had been shaped, expanded, and embellished by later, anonymous editors and revisers over the centuries.

QUESTION: How do you explain the "to this day" comments ?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 367 by polonius.advice]

Yes, I read the entire article. However I cannot seem to see the answer to my two questions in your post.

Are you suggesting that the above is universally accepted, proven fact?
https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/why ... -1.5440969

Are you suggesting that there are no bible prophecies that could have been fulfilled after 7th century BCE?

Do you feel inclined to answer the above?