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.

[Tcg]

And I should care because ...?

I didn't suggest you should care.

I do believe that the various historical events such as the dates related to the rift between the various Christian sects are a matter of historical record.

I didn't ask what you believe. I asked if you can present empirical evidence to support the chart you presented and it's claim that the JWs are wheat and all the others listed are weeds.. Am I to take this as your admission that you can't?

Are you suggesting there is no such thing as the Catholic/Orthodox church or that the reformation is fiction?

Please quote exactly my statement that caused you to think I would in any way suggest this. I don't recall making any statement that could result in such confusion.

And I should care because ...?

I don't know why you keep asking this. I never suggested you should care.

I'm not here to convince you and I couldn't care less if you are convinced or not. I am presenting information as to the Jehovah's Witness point of view no more no less; if you aren't convinced may I suggest you don't become one?

As I have already explained, I asked if you can present empirical evidence to support the chart you presented and it's claim that the JWs are wheat and all the others are weeds. If you can't, which certainly seems to be the case, a simple, "No" will suffice.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 425 by JehovahsWitness]

I would say, many have claimed this. Few Have flourished. No man can claim a true path to God. Nor any religion or belief.

I think Soloman's son had it right. "there is way that seems right to man but leads straight to death".

[JehovahsWitness]

I think Soloman's son had it right. "there is way that seems right to man but leads straight to death".

I would agree, the point would then be to figure out which way leads to death and avoid it. Didn't Jesus say he is the way the truth and the life?

JW

[Elijah John]

I think Soloman's son had it right. "there is way that seems right to man but leads straight to death".

I would agree, the point would then be to figure out which way leads to death and avoid it. Didn't Jesus say he is the way the truth and the life?

JW

If John's Jesus didn't think he was "God", then why wouldn't he say that Jehovah is the Truth, and the Life? I understand the "Way" part as Jesus seems to apply it to himself, but seem the "Truth" and the "Life" parts should only be applied to God.

[dio9]

Moderator removed one-line, non-contributing post. Kindly refrain from making posts that contribute nothing to debate and/or simply express agreement / disagreement or make other frivolous remarks.

For complimenting or agreeing use the "Like" function or the MGP button. For anything else use PM.

[polonius]

I think Soloman's son had it right. "there is way that seems right to man but leads straight to death".

I would agree, the point would then be to figure out which way leads to death and avoid it. Didn't Jesus say he is the way the truth and the life?

JW

RESPONSE: Jesus died around 30 AD. The "word, the truth, and the life" claim of one biographer, not a witness, writing to make converts 40 to 65 years after Jesus's death is hardly historical evidence.

[JehovahsWitness]

Jesus made the New Covenant for a Kingdom (ruling in heaven with him) with his 12 Apostles who were spirit-anointed by God. Then they went out and taught hundreds more that were present on the Day of Pentecost, 33 A.D., and who got spirit-anointed. We who simply observe at the Lord's Supper are not anointed to rule with Christ in heaven. We observe to show our appreciation for what Jesus did for all of mankind. Because of him we can live forever on the earth, just as God intended when he created it.

He has just explained in metaphoric language that the youngest is the leader and he himself is a servant. He gives them crowns and make sthem kings, metaphoricaly, just as he made himself a vine metaphorically. So why on earth would one suppose he is talking about an actual "kingdom"? And it is very dubious that Christ was crucified in 33AD, never mind the appearance of the Paraclete.


You are entitled to your rosy readings but let's remember they are mere interpretations, not facts taken from Scripture.

Yes, the vine was a metaphor, but all that he says about ruling with his Apostles within a real government is surely literal, because we have many passages in the Bible that speak of this government as one that will influence the whole world.

"For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, and the government is upon his shoulder....His empire shall be multiplied, and there shall be no end of peace. He shall sit upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom: to establish it and strengthen it with judgment and with justice, from henceforth and forever." (Isaiah 9:6,7, New Catholic Edition)

"But in the days of those kingdoms the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed...and it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever." (Daniel 2:44, New Catholic Edition)

Exactly!

Daniel presents prophetically what the Messiah would achieve. Jesus is indeed the prophecied "Prince of Peace" that will rule in a government. That's the same governmental "kindgom" mentioned in Matthew 6:9, 10. The beauty of the bible is how it all harmonizes when one takes a wholistic approach.

[polonius]

"For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, and the government is upon his shoulder....His empire shall be multiplied, and there shall be no end of peace. He shall sit upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom: to establish it and strengthen it with judgment and with justice, from henceforth and forever." (Isaiah 9:6,7, New Catholic Edition)


RESPONSE: But Jesus never sat on the throne of David or Solomon. In fact, if Matthew's or Luke's account is correct then:

Jesus was not the required biological son of either David or Solomon. And as for having Davidic blood through Mary, Luke tells she was the cousin (or blood relative) of Elizabeth a blood relative of Elizabeth a daughter of Arron, not David. See Luke chapter 2.

What a fiction the Nativity narratives are, written a they were 80 years after the fact by non- witnesses to make converts!

[brianbbs67]

I think Soloman's son had it right. "there is way that seems right to man but leads straight to death".

I would agree, the point would then be to figure out which way leads to death and avoid it. Didn't Jesus say he is the way the truth and the life?

JW

I don't think Jesus ever said those words together in print for us to read. John did.

But, Christ is recorded as saying no one comes to the Father except thru him. He is the gate keeper, apparently.

So, yes, we should follow Christ's example. What did he do? What did he instruct us to do? How did he tell us to live? That should be our focus.

[JehovahsWitness]

I think Soloman's son had it right. "there is way that seems right to man but leads straight to death".

I would agree, the point would then be to figure out which way leads to death and avoid it. Didn't Jesus say he is the way the truth and the life?

JW

I don't think Jesus ever said those words together in print for us to read. .

You quoted Solomon, I referred to Jesus and Solomon. Yes you are correct I was referring to Jesus words recorded in John 14:6.



JW