Missionaries In The Neighborhood

WebersHome · Nov 8, 2018

.
[OTHER]

Below is the text of Col 1:16-17 quoted verbatim from the Watchtower Society's New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures ©1969.

"Because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist."

Note that the word "other" is in brackets. This alert readers that "other" is not in the Greek manuscript; viz: the Society's editors took the liberty to pencil it in; which gives the impression that God's son was His first creation; and thereafter, His son created everything else.

One day, a pair of Watchtower missionaries came to my door consisting of an experienced worker and a trainee. I immediately began subjecting the trainee to a line of questioning that homed in on the Society's rather dishonest habit of penciling in words that go to reinforcing it's line of thinking.

I had him read the Society's text of Col 1:16-17 and then pointed out that the word "other" is in brackets to alert him to the fact that "other" is not in the Greek manuscript. The experienced worker corroborated my statement.

I then proceeded to have the trainee read the passage sans "other". It comes out like this:

"By means of him all things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all things and by means of him all things were made to exist."

The trainee's eyes really lit up; and he actually grinned with delight to discover that Col 1:16-17 reveals something quite different than what he was led to believe.

Had I pressed the attack; I would have pointed out to the trainee that the Society is inconsistent with its use of the word "other" by failing to pencil it into John 1:3 in order to make it read like this:

"All [other] things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one [other] thing came into existence."

Now; as to tampering with Paul's letters, and forcing them to mean things they don't say in writing; this is what Peter has to say about that.

● 2Pet 3:15-16 . . Furthermore, consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul according to the wisdom given him also wrote you, speaking about these things as he does also in all his letters. In them, however, are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unsteady are twisting, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Untaught people are oftentimes self-taught; and were the Society's missionaries to check into ol' Charles T. Russell's rather ignoble past; they'd find that "self-taught" pretty much describes the origin of their theology.

NOTE: The 1984 revised version of the New World Translation omits brackets around the word "other" in Col 1:16-17. However, it's readily seen from the Watchtower Society's Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures that "other" is nowhere to be found in the Greek text.
_

WebersHome · Nov 9, 2018

.
MONOGENES

Q: One translation of John 1:18 says that Jesus is the only-begotten god; while another translation says Jesus is the only begotten son. Which translation is correct?

A: Either translation will do because, biologically speaking, they're both saying the very same thing.

John 1:14, John 1:18, John 3:16, John 3:18, and 1John 4:9 are translated from the Greek word 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 couple's sole biological child in the New Testament. If a couple has two or more 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 because it wouldn't be the parents' biological child. Examples of monogenes children are located at Luke 7:12, Luke 8:42, and Luke 9:38.

So then, scientifically speaking, Christ is unique in that he is God's biological offspring, while God's other sons are not; viz: they're placed as sons, i.e. adopted. (Rom 8:15-16, Gal 4:4-6, Eph 1:4-5)

Q: God literally fathered a child?

A: I think it's probably a bit more accurate to say that God literally co-fathered a child.

Q: How did he do it? Is there a Mrs. God? And who was the other father?

A: Jesus' conception, described at Luke 1:26-35, wasn't only miraculous, it was a very unusual combination of human and divine.

David contributed the human element. (Luke 1:32, Acts 13:22-23, Rom 1:1-3, and 2Tim 2:8)

God contributed the divine element. (Luke 1:35 and 1John 3:9)

Jesus then, is just as much God's progeny as he is David's; and just as much David's progeny as he is God's.

Q: What about Heb 11:17 where Isaac is stated to be Abraham's monogenes child? Wasn't Ishmael a biological child of his too?

A: Isaac is the only biological child that Abraham and Sarah produced together; just as Jesus is the only biological child that God and Man produced together.

To say that this is all very baffling, illogical, unscientific, and unreasonable would be an understatement. In my mind's normal way of thinking, Christ's rather odd case of mixed-species genetics is an outlandish fantasy that, biologically, makes no sense at all. It's sort of like crossing an iguana with an apricot to produce a reptilian fruit tree. But; the circumstances of Christ's conception are in the Bible, so those of us who call ourselves Christians have got to accept it.
_

WebersHome · Nov 11, 2018

.
HO THEÓS

Q: Why does the Watchtower Society translate the Word in John 1:1 as a god in lower case instead of God in upper case?

A: The Watchtower Society's translation is based upon an imaginary grammatical technicality.

The common Greek word for "god" is theós. When it's modified by the little Greek definite article ho the Society translates theós in upper case, viz: in the Society's theological thinking; ho theós pertains to the one true God, while theós by itself is somewhat flexible, for example John 1:18 and John 20:17 where theós is translated in upper case though it be not modified by ho.

However, according to Dr. Archibald T. Robertson's Grammar Of The Greek New Testament, page 767: in regards to nouns in the predicate; the article is not essential to speech. In other words: when theόs is in the predicate, ho can be either used, or not used, without making any real difference.

So then; a translator's decision whether to capitalize either of the two theόs in John1:1 or not to capitalize them, is entirely arbitrary rather than dictated by a strict rule of Greek grammar.

The Society prefers "a god" because lower case is agreeable with their opinion of Christ's celestial status.
_

WebersHome · Nov 12, 2018

.
THE FIG TREE

● Mark 11:12-13 . .The next day, when they had come out from Bethany, he became hungry. And from a distance he caught sight of a fig tree that had leaves, and he went to see whether he would perhaps find something on it. But, on coming to it, he found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season of figs.

Q: If Jehovah really was in the world as the man Jesus, then why didn't He know by omniscience that the fig tree would have no fruit? Why was it necessary for Him to examine it up close in person?

A: Jehovah's conduct in that matter would've been unusual but by no means uncharacteristic.

In the 11th chapter of Genesis, the people built themselves a tower. Jehovah came down to see the tower. Now, if Jehovah is omnipresent and omniscient, then why bother coming down out of heaven to inspect the tower in person?

In the 18th chapter of Genesis, Jehovah announced to Abraham that He was on a journey to visit Sodom in order to determine whether the reports He was hearing about the city were true or not. Again: if Jehovah is omnipresent and omniscient, why bother coming down out of heaven to visit Sodom in person?

In the 22nd chapter of Genesis, Jehovah had Abraham offer his son as a sacrifice made with fire. At the conclusion of the event; a celestial being-- speaking for Jehovah and speaking as Jehovah --said: "Now I do know that you are God-fearing in that you have not withheld your son, your only one, from Me."

It goes without saying that Jehovah knows every man's thoughts, and He also knows the future, viz: nothing we do, say, or think catches Jehovah by surprise; He sees everything. So then, if Jehovah already knew in advance that Abraham would offer Isaac, and already knew in advance that Abraham was God-fearing, then why did He say "now I know"? Shouldn't Jehovah have already known?

The only sensible answer to those questions, including the question about the fig tree, is that there is a humanness to God that began quietly coming to light all the way back in the very beginning of the Bible; but the New Testament is where we see God's humanness on display even more.

● John 1:18 . . No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god, who is in the bosom position with the Father, is the one that has explained him.

"explained him" is accurate enough but doesn't really say it right-- "revealed him" is much better.

● John 14:7 . . . If you men had known me, you would have known my Father also; from this moment on you know him and have seen him. Philip said to him: "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." Jesus said to him: "Have I been with you men so long a time, and yet, Philip, you have not come to know me? He that has seen me has seen the Father also.

Q: Well then, why didn't Jesus use his divine powers to make that tree produce fruit for him to eat right then and there on the spot instead of cursing the poor thing?

A: Isn't that similar to the Devil's reasoning in the 4th chapter of Matthew?

The fact of the matter is: Jesus was micro-managed. He cursed that fig tree in compliance with his Father's wishes to do so.

● John 6:38 . . I have come down from heaven to do, not my will, but the will of him that sent me.

● John 8:28 . . I do nothing of my own initiative

● John 8:29 . . He that sent me is with me; He did not abandon me to myself, because I always do the things pleasing to Him.

● John 10:30 . . I and my Father are unified

● John 14:10 . . Do you not believe that I am in union with the Father, and the Father is in union with me?
_

WebersHome · Nov 13, 2018

.
FAIL SAFE

According to John 8:29, 2Cor 5:21, Heb 4:15, and 1Pet 2:22; Jesus committed no sins of his own.

The Watchtower Society is of the opinion that Christ didn't sin because he "chose" not to sin. That's what they say; but it's not what the Bible says. The fact of the matter is; Christ's divine genetics make it impossible for him to sin.

● 1John 3:9 . . Everyone who has been born from God does not carry on sin, because His [reproductive] seed remains in such one, and he cannot practice sin, because he has been born from God.

That translation makes it look as though one born of God sins now and then but not all the time; viz: doesn't make a habit of sin. But the text on the Greek side of the Kingdom Interlinear reads like this:

"He is not able to be sinning because out of God he has been generated."

There's more:

● Col 2:9 . . It is in him that all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily.

What we're looking at isn't nondescript divine quality; rather, the divine quality; viz: we're looking at the quality of God's divinity; which I think pretty safe to assume is impeccable. I seriously doubt even the Devil himself could fail and/or sin were he brimming with not just a percentage; but with all the quality of God's divinity.

Q: If it was impossible for Christ to sin; then what practical purpose did his temptation serve?

A: Christ testified "I always do the things pleasing to Him" (John 8:29). The Devil's failure to break Christ proves the truth of his statement. In other words: Christ was proof-tested to demonstrate that he contains no flaws.

No doubt the Devil expected that after forty days in the outback without food, Christ would be worn down to the point where he would no longer care whether he sinned or not. But it made no difference. Christ was still just as impervious to sin after forty days in the outback as he was during the first 30 years of his life in Nazareth because Christ's innocence doesn't depend upon his resolve; rather, upon his genetics so to speak; viz: upon God's [reproductive] seed.

While we're on the subject: what is the one thing God cannot do? Well; the JWs' conditioned response is that God cannot lie (Heb 6:18). But a better response than that is God cannot sin. In point of fact: it is just as impossible for God to sin as it is for His progeny to sin. I mean; think about it. If God's progeny is unable to sin due to the intrinsically sinless nature of God's reproductive seed; then it goes without saying that the source of that seed would be unable to sin too.

● Jas 1:13 . . For with evil things God cannot be tried.
_

WebersHome · Nov 14, 2018

.
THOMAS' GOD(S)

● John 20:28 . . Thomas said to him: "My Lord and my God!"

"God" is from the Greek word theós

Many moons ago; I asked some Watchtower Society missionaries to explain to me why the Society translated theós in upper case in Thomas' statement seeing as how in Watchtower theology; only Jehovah should be referred to with capital letters. Well; they were too inexperienced to explain and my question left them stumped.

The fact of the matter is: in John 20:28, theós is modified by the Greek definite article "ho". So by the Society's own rules; its translators had to use upper case because it is their practice that whenever theós is modified by the Greek definite article, then the upper case is required.

For argument's sake; let's remove the upper cases and translate the passage like this:

Thomas said to him: "my lord and my god!"

We could tolerate a lower case lord because that was a common way to address just about any superior back in those days, whether divine or otherwise; for example 1Pet 3:6.

However; we would have difficulty with a lower case god because the passage is possessive. In other words: the apostle Thomas didn't just declare that Jesus was a god. No, Thomas clearly declared that Jesus was his god.

The covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with Jehovah in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy forbids them to possess more than one god.

"And God proceeded to speak all these words, saying: I am Jehovah your God, who have brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slaves. You must not have any other gods against my face." (Ex 20:1-30

"against my face" is a combination of two Hebrew words that essentially refer to God's competitors. In other words: it is not Jehovah's wishes to have a market share of His people's affections; no, He'll settle for nothing less than 100%. (cf. Mark 12:28-30)

If the apostle Thomas was a Torah-trained Jew, then he was fully aware that possessing any other god but Jehovah would incur the covenant's curse upon himself.

● Deut 27:26 . . Cursed is the one who will not put the words of this law in force by doing them.

The way I see it: the Society has two options. Either the apostle Thomas knew what he was doing when he addressed Jesus as his god, or he meant to say something else.

Now, if the apostle Thomas knew what he was doing when he addressed Jesus as his god, then John Q and Jane Doe JWs need to ask around and find out why it is that Jesus Christ was the apostle Thomas' god but he isn't the Watchtower Society's god.

Plus: I would really like to know how it is that the apostle Thomas and the Watchtower Society are poles apart in their opinions of Christ's divine status when Thomas actually associated with Christ and was one of his close personal friends.
_

WebersHome · Nov 15, 2018

.
CHRIST'S GOD

● John 20:17 . . Be on your way to my brothers and say to them; "I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God."

Q: If Jesus is God, as classical Christianity claims, then how can he have a god? Does God worship Himself?

A: I have yet to encounter the language of John 20:17 in reverse, viz: I have yet to see a passage in the Bible where the Father refers to His son as "my God".

For simplicity's sake; it helps to think of the true God as a species; viz: if indeed a true God were to beget a child, He would beget a child of like species; i.e. a true God would beget a true divine being like Himself because that's the only kind of offspring that a true God could engender; just as when a true human begets a child, they beget a child of like species i.e. they beget a true human being like themselves because that's the only kind of offspring that a true human can engender.

There is a hierarchy in the divine relationship just as there is a hierarchy in human relationships. Though all members of a human family are equally human, they are not all equal in rank and privilege; some are superior and some are subordinate. (cf. John 14:28, 1Cor 15:28)

Now, we can volley back and forth with JWs, countering each other's verses with more verses: verse upon verse; but I can just about guarantee that us and they will both be chasing our tails and getting nowhere unless we approach the Son's relationship to his Father from a biological perspective; which is a perspective that just about anybody with even a cursory knowledge of the birds and the bees can understand with ease.

The Watchtower Bible And Tract Society calls Jesus "the only-begotten son from a Father" and also "the only-begotten god". Well, don't let that mislead you. The Society dare not accept Christ's status as God's literal offspring because the ramifications would require them to revise their theology.
_

WebersHome · Nov 16, 2018

.
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 missionaries, 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.

Their 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.
_

WebersHome · Nov 17, 2018

.
LEARNING OBEDIENCE

● Heb 5:7-9 . . In the days of his flesh Christ offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear. Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered; and after he had been made perfect he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him

The "perfection" Jesus Christ obtained by means of his suffering is directly related to his priesthood rather than his personal conduct.

● Heb 5:10 . . Because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of Melchizedek.

In order for a priest to be effective, he has to be capable of empathy.

● Heb 5:1-3 . . For every high priest taken from among men is appointed in behalf of men over the things pertaining to God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. He is able to deal moderately with the ignorant and erring ones since he also is surrounded with his own weakness, and on its account he is obliged to make offerings for sins as much for himself as for the people.

Jesus Christ of course could do no wrong of his own; but he was put through the wringer so he'd have a taste of what us mere mortals face every day of our lives.

● Heb 4:15 . . For we have as high priest, not one who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has been tested in all respects like ourselves, but without sin.

Hence, the purpose of the suffering that the Son endured was for a far different purpose than the discipline which the Father's lesser sons are put through at Heb 12:5-11 since according to 1John 3:9 and Col 2:9 it was, and it still is, impossible for God's son to ever be unholy, or unrighteous, or disobedient.

In other words; the Son's suffering was for the purpose of experiencing first-hand what it's like to obey as a human being. As the Word in heaven, obedience is his way of life because according to John 1:1-14, the Word is a god; but the rest of us are mere mortals. Obedience isn't a piece of cake for those of us who are only human.

It's one thing to sympathize and say you feel your fellow man's pain; but in order to truly empathize with his pain; you've got to go through it yourself. It's exactly that which makes Jesus an excellent choice for high priesthood in heaven because the things he suffered made him a "merciful" high priest; viz: an high priest that's truly one of us instead of an indifferent judgmental bigot from another world.

During America's dust bowl era in the 1930's, the Federal Farm Security Administration sent out an educated young lady named Sonora Babb to counsel migrant farm workers out west. Nobody trusted her until they found out she grew up in the so-called No Man's Land of the southern great plains. Sonora wasn't just another indifferent stuffed-shirt bureaucrat. She was familiar with the dust bowlers' way of life first-hand, and it made all the difference in the quality of her rapport with migrant farm workers.
_

WebersHome · Nov 17, 2018

.
I'm not in the habit of offering unsolicited spiritual counseling on internet forums; but today I probably should.

Post No.29 pertained to Christ's high priesthood. Non-anointed Jehovah's Witnesses-- a.k.a. the earthly class; viz: the hewers of wood and haulers of water, the great crowd ---do not have direct access to it, rather, they have indirect access to Christ's high priesthood via their affiliation with the Watchtower Society. (See post No.11)

May I suggest to any and/or all JWs hereabout that they take advantage of whatever degree of access they have for now and speak up candidly and forthrightly with Christ, asking him if there isn't some way to take advantage of his high priesthood's services without having to be affiliated with the Watchtower Society; i.e. as a free moral agent instead of dependent upon a hierarchy.

It's a reasonable request, and I'm pretty sure if asked in all honesty and sincerity that Christ will get back to its inquirer with a response.

● John 6:37-28 . . Everything the Father gives me will come to me, and the one that comes to me I will by no means drive away; because I have come down from heaven to do, not my will, but the will of him that sent me.

● Heb 4:16 . . Let us, therefore, approach with freeness of speech to the throne of undeserved kindness, that we may obtain mercy and find undeserved kindness for help at the right time.
_

Ron Gurley · Nov 19, 2018

JW's are a cult with a false theology contrary to true Christ- following.

WebersHome · Nov 19, 2018

.
THE LAST ADAM

● 1Cor 15:45a . . The first man Adam became a living soul.

● 1Cor 15:47 . .The first man is out of the earth and made of dust

Those verses are references to Gen 2:7, which reads like this:

"Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man came to be a living soul."

The Watchtower Society alleges that Jehovah God wasn't directly involved in creating the first man, rather, His involvement was indirect. According to them, the actual work was done by the hand of a divine being called the Word.

"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." (John 1:1-3)

Seeing as that's the case; then the breath of life spoken of in Gen 2:7 was blown into the first man's nostrils by the Word. In all respects then, we owe the beginning of the original human race to the Word just as much as we owe it to Jehovah God because both are given credit for its origin.

● 1Cor 15:45b . .The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

That verse speaks of the origin of yet another human race. This second human race wasn't made of dust from the ground, nor was it given consciousness by blowing into its nostrils the breath of life, nor did it come to be a living soul.

Up to this point; I'm told of only two life-giving spirits in the Bible: the Word and Jehovah God. So unless there is now three life-giving spirits, I feel safe to conclude that the last Adam is one of the two; i.e. he's either the Word or he's Jehovah God. Well; it's easy to show by John 1:14 that the last Adam and the Word are one and the same person.

"So the Word became flesh and resided among us"

Q: When did this last Adam become a life-giving spirit? At his birth or at his resurrection?

A: According to 1 John 1:1-2, the Word is an everlasting life which, according to Gen 21:33 and Rom 16:26, is an indestructible category of life that's impervious to death. And according to John 1:1, the Word is a god. Well; people die, but gods never die. (Ps 82:6-7)

So the Word didn't go out of existence when he came into the world as an h.sapiens; which means of course that Jesus Christ was a life-giving spirit right from the moment of his conception rather than at his resurrection.

Q: So you're saying a created man pioneered the original human race; and a man who's both creator and created pioneered the second human race?

A: Yes.

● 1Cor 15:47 . .The second man is out of heaven.

● John 6:38 . . I have come down from heaven

● John 6:42 . . They began saying: Is this not Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it that now he says: I have come down from heaven?

The dual nature of Christ's existence is a fatal hang-up for the Watchtower Society due to its spurious belief that it's impossible for the Word to exist as a human being and a spirit being simultaneously. But the evidence is very difficult to refute.

It ain't what you know that gets you into trouble.
It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
(Mark Twain)
_

WebersHome · Nov 20, 2018

.
THE ANOINTING

● 1John 2:26-27 . .These things I write you about those who are trying to mislead you. And as for you, the anointing that you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to be teaching you; but, as the anointing from him is teaching you about all things, and is true and is no lie, and just as it has taught you, remain in union with him.

The anointing provides people with some valuable advantages to which people who lack it of course have no access.

1• Protects people from deception

2• Enables people to grasp Jesus Christ's teachings the way he wants them grasped

3• Makes it possible for people to remain in union with him.

According to Watchtower Society theology, only 144,000 special Jehovah's Witnesses have the anointing. There aren't that many living Witnesses who have the anointing though because when anointed Witnesses die, their passing doesn't create vacancies; viz: 144,000 is the maximum unless an anointed JW either apostatizes or is ousted via the process of disfellowship.

What that means is: the vast majority of today's living JWs don't have the anointing. We're talking about some serious numbers here. Currently, there are approximately 8.2 million living Witnesses. Even if all 144,000 anointed Witnesses were alive today, that would leave 8,056,000 JWs roaming the earth in our day who 1) have no protection from deception, 2) are unable to grasp Jesus Christ's teachings the way he wants them grasped, and 3) not in union with him.

Doubtless there are numbers of ordinary Witnesses who sincerely believe that their association with the Watchtower Society keeps them in union with Jesus Christ; but according to 1John 2:26-27, union with Jesus Christ isn't accomplished on the coattails of an organization; it's accomplished by means of the anointing.

Watchtower Society missionaries sincerely believing themselves in union with Jesus Christ without the anointing are each themselves "one of those who are trying to mislead you".
_

WebersHome · Nov 21, 2018

.
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.
_

WebersHome · Nov 22, 2018

.
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)
_

WebersHome · Nov 23, 2018

.
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.
_

WebersHome · Nov 24, 2018

.
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.

If Jesus Christ's resurrection is true-- if his dead body actually recovered just as Jonah's-- then Jesus most certainly is the one man in the New Testament that everybody really ought to approach with a great deal of caution because Jonah's message warned of the impending destruction of just one city; while Jesus' message warns of the impending destruction of many cities. (Rev 16:17-19)

● Matt 12:41 . . Men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it; because they repented at what Jonah preached, but, look! something more than Jonah is here.
_

WebersHome · Nov 25, 2018

.
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. (Ps 110:1, Col 3:1)
_

WebersHome · Nov 26, 2018

.
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.
_

WebersHome · Nov 28, 2018

.
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.
_

Missionaries In The Neighborhood

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

What U See is What U Get!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads