Evangelicals vs. Jehovah's Witnesses

[Elijah John]

Evangelicals often call Jehovah's Witnesses, a "cult" and not Christian.

Jehovah's Witnesses, seem to consider Roman Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox etc, "not-Christian" (JWs please correct me if I'm wrong on this)

Question for debate, why can't all of these groups rightly be considered "Christian"?

And part two of this OP question is directed primarily to Evangelicals, why don't you consider JWs to be Christian?

[Claire Evans]

Claire Evans posted:

They do not believe that Jesus' physical body resurrected. Is this your belief?

____________________________________________________________________

ONEWITHHIM RESPONDS:

(1) We believe that Jesus was not resurrected in a physical body. That is correct. If the Gnostics happen to believe that too, that's OK with us. JWs do NOT believe the following, which Gnostics believe:

(a) That all of mankind will be resurrected to life in spirit bodies.
(b) That most of the canonical Scriptures are not really the Word of God.
(c) That the earth was created in a flawed manner.
(d) That the blame for the world's failings lies with the Creator.
(e) That the True God did not actually create anything but he "emanated" it from within himself, bringing forth the substance of all there is; ALL is God, for all consists of the substance of God.
(f) That "Sophia," one of the "aeonial beings," is of any importance, and that from her own being came a being that imagined himself to be the ultimate and absolute God, with his minions the Archons.
(g) That it is not salvation from sin that we aspire to, but salvation from ignorance. It is not by Christ's suffering and death that he has performed his work of salvation, but by his life of teaching and his "establishing of mysteries."


There is much more, and most of it is very complicated and convoluted. From what I have listed here, I think it is plain to see that JWs do not agree with Gnostics on most things.

Agreed but should Gnostic and JWs believe the same empty tomb resurrection account?

(2) I don't quite get your discussion of "quickening." I Peter 3:18 says that Christ was put to death in the flesh and "quickened" in the spirit. He was made alive in the spirit. He had a spirit body, upon being resurrected. You didn't answer my question: "What spirit entered into Christ's glorified body?"

He was made alive by the Holy Spirit, hence quickening which means make alive.


Other versions of the Bible corroborate this:

“For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.� (NIV)

1 Peter 3:18-20King James Version (KJV)

18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

(3) Jesus became a human when he came to Earth. He was not a spirit any longer, the way he had been in heaven (just as the Father, God, is [John 4:24]). So when he died, it wasn't a spirit being that died. It was his physical body---which he GAVE UP for our salvation. The scripture about "quickening" does not say that Jesus' physical body was made alive. Another version of the Bible says: "...having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit." (NASB) Pretty clear.

Then the empty tomb story is a farce.

(5) Jesus didn't have to rise in a physical body to give us the assurance that there will be a resurrection of "both the righteous and the unrighteous." (Acts 24:15) The fact that he was resurrected AT ALL shows us that the dead will rise.

What about the accounts in the Bible when Jesus appeared to hundreds after His death? Was He an apparition?

(7) God does NOT "favor the 144,000 over the rest of us." President Obama's cabinet isn't made up of superior human beings. They are all regular humans. In like manner, Jesus' "cabinet" of 144,000 are not special superior persons. They are all just like regular people. They just have been given a great assignment, to serve and guide the billions of people on the earth during Christ's Millennial Reign.

(8) Your understanding of Revelation 21 needs a bit of help. Why would it be literal when most of Revelation is SYMBOLIC? For arguments' sake, let's just say for a moment that the number 144,000 is not literal. Let's set it on the shelf and not pay any attention to it. Does that change anything? No, because we know that Jesus will have many of his followers in heaven with him to rule over the earth. He said so a number of times. (Matt.19:28; Matt.20:21-23) In Revelation 7 there are two groups portrayed, the "12 tribes of Israel" and then a great crowd which has no number. So whether or not there are LITERALLY 144,000 in heaven, we have a situation where some are ruling with Jesus and some who are not. So, we have taken out the most agitating point, to you, of 144,000 literal persons. Now the whole book of Revelation is SYMBOLIC, right?

Matthew 19:28 and 20, when referring to the thrones, means just receiving eternal salvation.

"Judging the twelve tribes - From the parallel place, Luke 22:28-30, it is evident that sitting on thrones, and judging the twelve tribes, means simply obtaining eternal salvation, and the distinguishing privileges of the kingdom of glory, by those who continued faithful to Christ in his sufferings and death."


Judging, κ�ινοντες . Kypke has shown that κ�ινεσθαι is to be understood in the sense of governing, presiding, holding the first or most distinguished place. Thus, Genesis 49:16, Dan shall Judge his people, i.e. shall preside in, or rule over them; shall occupy a chief place among the tribes. It is well known that the Judges among the Jews were moderators, captains, chief, or head men. The sense therefore of our Lord's words appears to be, that these disciples should have those distinguished seats in glory which seem to belong peculiarly to the first confessors and martyrs. See 1 Thessalonians 4:14, 1 Thessalonians 4:16, and particularly Revelation 20:4-6.

http://biblehub.com/1_thessalonians/4-16.htm

Therefore, if we accept this, this passage refers to the after-life. We know nobody can stay on earth forever. The old earth will pass away.


Is the whole of Revelation symbolic? I don't think so.

Why do you take chapter 21, verses 1-3, as literal? New Jerusalem is coming down out of heaven. What exactly IS the New Jerusalem? It's not even a literal city! New Jerusalem is the Bride of Christ....it is made up of Jesus' anointed co-rulers. What has "passed away" in verse 1? The former heaven and the former earth. Could this mean that the former governments of earth are gone, and the former world of wicked mankind is gone? "The sea is no more"....could that mean that the roiling, disgruntled masses of people that inhabited the earth are gone? Revelation itself defined "the sea" as people. (Rev.17:15) No one will be disgruntled in the new system of things. The planet will always be here:

"A generation is going, and a generation is coming; but the earth is standing forever." (Ecclesiastes 1:4)

"Those hoping in Jehovah will possess the earth....They will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace....The righteous will possess the earth, and they will reside forever upon it." (Psalm 37:9b,11b,29)

Well, Jesus said there would be no more death and as long as we have this earth, there will always be death. Mortal bodies live on this earth. What is the old order that has passed away? A place where this is no death? That is what it is saying.


Regarding Ecclesiastes, many people get confused with the contexts of things because the Bible has been translated into English:

"The Jehovah’s Witnesses contend that “this earth was created, not to be destroyed, but to be inhabited forever by righteous, perfect men and women� (Let God Be True, p. 264). They appeal to such passages as Ecciesiastes 1:4, “. . . the earth abideth for ever� (cf. Psalm 78:69). What they fail to perceive, however, is that the term “for ever� does not always denote an absolutely endless existence. The Hebrew word olam basically means “age-lasting.� It is employed to describe the duration of the Passover, and the Levitical priesthood (Exodus 12:14; Numbers 25:13), both of which lasted only as long as the Mosaic economy. These references should be entered in the margin of your Bible in connection with Ecclesiastes 1:4 and Psalm 78:69.

Too, note this interesting passage. In Isaiah 32, the prophet of God depicts the horrible punishment that is to be visited upon Jerusalem (the capital city of Judah) on account of the nation’s transgressions. He says the holy city will be deserted and become the haunts of animals “for ever� (v. 14). Yet, in the very next verse, he declares that these conditions will prevail only “until the Spirit be poured upon us from on high,� (a prophecy of the blessings of the gospel age – cf. Joel 2:28ff). Underline the term “for ever� in verse 14, and then mark the word “until� in verse 15. Connect them. The latter word clearly shows that “for ever� can be used in a qualified sense. The context must determine the meaning in a given setting.

The earth will not literally last for ever. In Ecclesiastes 1:4, etc., the expression is used relatively. The New Testament makes it quite plain that the material universe will be destroyed eventually (cf. Matthew 24:35; 2 Peter 3:5-13).:

This applies to the Psalms, too.

https://www.christiancourier.com/articl ... es-forever

The Gnostic fellow that you quote might believe that people are raised in the spirit, but he doesn't agree with JWs. We believe that only a certain number will be raised in the spirit, and MOST people that have died will be raised back to physical bodies.

As I said, not everything Gnostics believe match the JWs but the most important one and that there Christ's resurrection was just spiritual.

You try to equate JWs with what the RCC has done, and that is erroneous. JWs discipline the pedophiles and the adulterers, etc. The RCC doesn't. JWs do have the "two witness" rule, gotten from the Bible. It protects a person from being accused unfairly. And I have NEVER heard of the "three year rule" for sins of elders.

What? Are you serious? You are defending the WTS? Paedophilia is a criminal offence. Paedophiles belong in jail. To put paedophiles and adulterers in the same category is wrong. Adulterers don't go to jail. The WTS is obstructing justice. In fact, that in itself is a criminal offence.

How do you know that the WTS disciplines paedophiles?

We have never said that just a few will inherit eternal life. You are making that up.


[/u][/b]

Remaining on earth forever and ever in our mortal bodies is not inheriting eternal life.

(1) Do JWs believe the same resurrection account as the Gnostics? I actually don't remember off-hand what the Gnostics believe; I'd have to go back and look. What I can say is what JWs believe: Jesus was raised back to life in a spirit body, and AS SUCH went and talked with the demons in the spirit realm. (I Peter 3:18-20, NASB) A couple of versions say that Jesus was "made alive BY the Spirit," which is actually true, but the reason we know that other versions that say "Made alive IN THE SPIRIT" are more correct is because it is contrasting his death IN THE FLESH with the manner in which he was raised---IN THE SPIRIT. (NASB; NAB; New Catholic Edition; Moffatt Translation; Young's Literal Translation) And I could go on, but I've got to get ready for an appointment.

(2) Later

You are seriously confusing me. You say that you believe in the empty tomb account yet say His physical body did not rise from the dead? "By the spirit" makes far more sense if one believes in the empty tomb theory. You can't have it both way. Either you believe He rose with a spirit body or acknowledge that the empty tomb account is false. Rising with a spirit body would mean His physical body would still be in the tomb and that is not what the gospels say.

[Claire Evans]

three witnesses every matter may be established. If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector."

Where's the part about shunning?

And your question about the empty tomb was answered by me quite awhile ago.


.

Please post again because I did not see it. Please comment on this:

Matthew 28:13


…12After the chief priests had met with the elders and formed a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money 13and instructed them: “You are to say, ‘His disciples came by night and stole His body while we were asleep. 14If this report reaches the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.�…

If His physical body remained and was still there then why suggest the disciples stole it?

It is in my post #549. (Three sentences up from the bottom.) I'll bump it up here after I respond to Matthew 28:13. JWs have never said that Jesus' body was still in the tomb. Please don't post things about somebody that you can't substantiate.


.

If not in the tomb, where was it??

[2timothy316]

And 144 000 is an occult number.

No it's not. That number can be found in the book of Revelation. It was the number given to John by Jesus Christ through an angel. John then wrote it down in what we know as the book of Revelation.

It appears way before that.

In Tutankhamen's sun necklace, the numbers 144 000 and 666 are encoded.
The carving of Lord Pacal had 144 000 on his forehead encoded also.

https://books.google.co.za/books?id=D3F ... 00&f=false




The book of Revelation starts this way...

"A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent his angel and presented it in signs through him to his slave John." - Revelation 1:1.

Do you disagree that John was writing down a 'revelation by Jesus Christ'?

I believe there are some parts in Revelation is from God but I believe there are some parts that are from Gnostics.

I do not agree with your 'sources' and the Bible is not up for debate. This subfourm is about doctrine based on the Bible not the Bible itself. However there are those that claim that JWs don't follow the Bible. I would like to point out that this is further evidence that Jehovah's Witnesses do in fact follow the Bible where others do not for whatever their reason. When debating with a JW you will find yourself face to face with the choice between a doctrine and the Bible. When a person tosses out the Bible as true and pursues their own doctrine over the Bible, JWs have nothing else debate about. From our point of view, Jehovah's Word the Bible has revealed the person's desire to follow themselves and not His Word the Bible.

Since this is the case, Claire your first issue is with the Bible. Your issues with JWs are secondary because you don't like that we follow the Bible. Because as we just read, you reject some of the Bible. Since JWs base all doctrine on the Bible to the best of our ability, you will never agree with us. So when you accept the whole Bible as God's Word, then we will have something to talk about. Until then, I wish you well.

[onewithhim]

Just so we are clear, by the comment above you agree there are those where 2 John 9-11 should be enforced? It also seems you agree that, like I have been saying this whole time, this 'rejecting' of a person is for more than just making a mistake. It's for serious practiced sin. 2 John 9-11 is not to be applied to those that make a mistake and repent, but must be applied to those that knowingly and willfully go against the example Jesus set without repentance. Don't you agree?

I don't agree nor does Jesus.

Then let this be an example of where Jehovah's Witnesses know and follow the Bible were others don't. Jesus said that those that don't know the scriptures would be in error. Not only that, they don't know the power of God in the scriptures.

"Jesus said to them: “Is not this why you are mistaken, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?" - Mark 12:24

Also, don't be so quick to speak for Jesus. "For the Father judges no one at all, but he has entrusted all the judging to the Son, so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him." John 5:22, 23.

Just who do you think told John to write what he did? Jesus is charge of the congregation. John was simply following Jesus' command to write what he was told to write. The same person that followed Jesus and was God-Inspired to write the Gospel of John also wrote 2 John 9-11.

"Indeed, that is why we also thank God unceasingly, because when you received God’s word, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but, just as it truthfully is, as the word of God, which is also at work in you believers." 1 Thessalonians 2:13.

Now for the question of Evangelicals vs JWs. Shouldn't the true religion follow the commands in the Bible? Like 2 John 9-11.

Shouldn't those belonging to the true religion believe in the empty tomb resurrection account?

JWs do believe in the empty tomb account, and you haven't substantiated your claim that we don't.

Also, we follow the commands in the Bible and you do not. I can say that because you dismiss out-of-hand the admonishment from the Scriptures to disfellowship anyone who practices serious sins.

.

Truly odd. If you believe in the empty tomb account, then you believe Jesus' physical body rose from the dead. What is it now? Just a spiritual resurrection or the resurrection of the body?

Odd? Didn't Paul explain that the physical body CHANGES after one of the anointed dies? Couldn't it very well be that that is what happened to Jesus's physical body?(I Corinthians 15:42-51) I'm sorry, but you always seem to forget what Paul said about bodies in I Corinth. chapter 15. What Paul says there does not agree with what you say about Jesus being resurrected with a physical body. I don't know how it can be explained any better.

.

[tam]

[Replying to post 600 by onewithhim]

Odd? Didn't Paul explain that the physical body CHANGES after one of the anointed dies?

Yes, Paul did explain that the body changes. (your definition and application of the word anointed is unique to jws, however.)


Christ rose with the glorified body - the spirit body - one that is capable of eating, being touched and seen, walking upon the earth, etc (physical), and one that is also capable of appearing and disappearing; moving through walls; ascending to the spiritual realm.

Moving from matter to energy (and vice versa), so to speak.

Same as the angels can do. Just as we will be able do when given the white robe (the spirit body).


Remember that Christ said He was going to return, that every eye would see Him; and Revelation also says that the Bride, the New Jerusalem, comes down out of heaven.



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

[onewithhim]

Claire Evans posted:

They do not believe that Jesus' physical body resurrected. Is this your belief?

____________________________________________________________________

ONEWITHHIM RESPONDS:

(1) We believe that Jesus was not resurrected in a physical body. That is correct. If the Gnostics happen to believe that too, that's OK with us. JWs do NOT believe the following, which Gnostics believe:

(a) That all of mankind will be resurrected to life in spirit bodies.
(b) That most of the canonical Scriptures are not really the Word of God.
(c) That the earth was created in a flawed manner.
(d) That the blame for the world's failings lies with the Creator.
(e) That the True God did not actually create anything but he "emanated" it from within himself, bringing forth the substance of all there is; ALL is God, for all consists of the substance of God.
(f) That "Sophia," one of the "aeonial beings," is of any importance, and that from her own being came a being that imagined himself to be the ultimate and absolute God, with his minions the Archons.
(g) That it is not salvation from sin that we aspire to, but salvation from ignorance. It is not by Christ's suffering and death that he has performed his work of salvation, but by his life of teaching and his "establishing of mysteries."


There is much more, and most of it is very complicated and convoluted. From what I have listed here, I think it is plain to see that JWs do not agree with Gnostics on most things.

Agreed but should Gnostic and JWs believe the same empty tomb resurrection account?

(2) I don't quite get your discussion of "quickening." I Peter 3:18 says that Christ was put to death in the flesh and "quickened" in the spirit. He was made alive in the spirit. He had a spirit body, upon being resurrected. You didn't answer my question: "What spirit entered into Christ's glorified body?"

He was made alive by the Holy Spirit, hence quickening which means make alive.


Other versions of the Bible corroborate this:

“For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.� (NIV)

1 Peter 3:18-20King James Version (KJV)

18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

(3) Jesus became a human when he came to Earth. He was not a spirit any longer, the way he had been in heaven (just as the Father, God, is [John 4:24]). So when he died, it wasn't a spirit being that died. It was his physical body---which he GAVE UP for our salvation. The scripture about "quickening" does not say that Jesus' physical body was made alive. Another version of the Bible says: "...having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit." (NASB) Pretty clear.

Then the empty tomb story is a farce.

(5) Jesus didn't have to rise in a physical body to give us the assurance that there will be a resurrection of "both the righteous and the unrighteous." (Acts 24:15) The fact that he was resurrected AT ALL shows us that the dead will rise.

What about the accounts in the Bible when Jesus appeared to hundreds after His death? Was He an apparition?

(7) God does NOT "favor the 144,000 over the rest of us." President Obama's cabinet isn't made up of superior human beings. They are all regular humans. In like manner, Jesus' "cabinet" of 144,000 are not special superior persons. They are all just like regular people. They just have been given a great assignment, to serve and guide the billions of people on the earth during Christ's Millennial Reign.

(8) Your understanding of Revelation 21 needs a bit of help. Why would it be literal when most of Revelation is SYMBOLIC? For arguments' sake, let's just say for a moment that the number 144,000 is not literal. Let's set it on the shelf and not pay any attention to it. Does that change anything? No, because we know that Jesus will have many of his followers in heaven with him to rule over the earth. He said so a number of times. (Matt.19:28; Matt.20:21-23) In Revelation 7 there are two groups portrayed, the "12 tribes of Israel" and then a great crowd which has no number. So whether or not there are LITERALLY 144,000 in heaven, we have a situation where some are ruling with Jesus and some who are not. So, we have taken out the most agitating point, to you, of 144,000 literal persons. Now the whole book of Revelation is SYMBOLIC, right?

Matthew 19:28 and 20, when referring to the thrones, means just receiving eternal salvation.

"Judging the twelve tribes - From the parallel place, Luke 22:28-30, it is evident that sitting on thrones, and judging the twelve tribes, means simply obtaining eternal salvation, and the distinguishing privileges of the kingdom of glory, by those who continued faithful to Christ in his sufferings and death."


Judging, κ�ινοντες . Kypke has shown that κ�ινεσθαι is to be understood in the sense of governing, presiding, holding the first or most distinguished place. Thus, Genesis 49:16, Dan shall Judge his people, i.e. shall preside in, or rule over them; shall occupy a chief place among the tribes. It is well known that the Judges among the Jews were moderators, captains, chief, or head men. The sense therefore of our Lord's words appears to be, that these disciples should have those distinguished seats in glory which seem to belong peculiarly to the first confessors and martyrs. See 1 Thessalonians 4:14, 1 Thessalonians 4:16, and particularly Revelation 20:4-6.

http://biblehub.com/1_thessalonians/4-16.htm

Therefore, if we accept this, this passage refers to the after-life. We know nobody can stay on earth forever. The old earth will pass away.


Is the whole of Revelation symbolic? I don't think so.

Why do you take chapter 21, verses 1-3, as literal? New Jerusalem is coming down out of heaven. What exactly IS the New Jerusalem? It's not even a literal city! New Jerusalem is the Bride of Christ....it is made up of Jesus' anointed co-rulers. What has "passed away" in verse 1? The former heaven and the former earth. Could this mean that the former governments of earth are gone, and the former world of wicked mankind is gone? "The sea is no more"....could that mean that the roiling, disgruntled masses of people that inhabited the earth are gone? Revelation itself defined "the sea" as people. (Rev.17:15) No one will be disgruntled in the new system of things. The planet will always be here:

"A generation is going, and a generation is coming; but the earth is standing forever." (Ecclesiastes 1:4)

"Those hoping in Jehovah will possess the earth....They will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace....The righteous will possess the earth, and they will reside forever upon it." (Psalm 37:9b,11b,29)

Well, Jesus said there would be no more death and as long as we have this earth, there will always be death. Mortal bodies live on this earth. What is the old order that has passed away? A place where this is no death? That is what it is saying.



We believe that only a certain number will be raised in the spirit, and MOST people that have died will be raised back to physical bodies.

As I said, not everything Gnostics believe match the JWs but the most important one and that there Christ's resurrection was just spiritual.

You try to equate JWs with what the RCC has done, and that is erroneous. JWs discipline the pedophiles and the adulterers, etc. The RCC doesn't. JWs do have the "two witness" rule, gotten from the Bible. It protects a person from being accused unfairly. And I have NEVER heard of the "three year rule" for sins of elders.

What? Are you serious? You are defending the WTS? Paedophilia is a criminal offence. Paedophiles belong in jail. To put paedophiles and adulterers in the same category is wrong. Adulterers don't go to jail. The WTS is obstructing justice. In fact, that in itself is a criminal offence.

How do you know that the WTS disciplines paedophiles?

We have never said that just a few will inherit eternal life. You are making that up.


[/u][/b]

Remaining on earth forever and ever in our mortal bodies is not inheriting eternal life.

(1) Do JWs believe the same resurrection account as the Gnostics? I actually don't remember off-hand what the Gnostics believe; I'd have to go back and look. What I can say is what JWs believe: Jesus was raised back to life in a spirit body, and AS SUCH went and talked with the demons in the spirit realm. (I Peter 3:18-20, NASB) A couple of versions say that Jesus was "made alive BY the Spirit," which is actually true, but the reason we know that other versions that say "Made alive IN THE SPIRIT" are more correct is because it is contrasting his death IN THE FLESH with the manner in which he was raised---IN THE SPIRIT. (NASB; NAB; New Catholic Edition; Moffatt Translation; Young's Literal Translation) And I could go on, but I've got to get ready for an appointment.

(2) Later

You say that as long as we have the earth there will be death. Could you support that statement with Scripture? Do you not agree that when Adam was created he was created to live forever on the earth, provided he didn't choose to disobey God? If he had respected Jehovah and obeyed Him, Adam would still be here. As long as humans would've obeyed God, there would have been no death. All humans would still be here on Earth. So why do you say as long as we have the earth there will be death?

The old "earth" or the old order that will pass away is not the physical planet. It is the old society of people alienated from God. That is what will pass away. Can you honestly imagine this beautiful planet being destroyed because of what man has done to it? Uh-uh. The earth can re-invigorate itself, with some help from people being guided by Jesus and his co-rulers.

So in Matthew 19 when Jesus mentions "thrones," that just means "eternal salvation"? Do you mean that EVERYONE will rule from a throne? BILLIONS of people will rule from their own throne? Can you explain that please, exactly how that will work?

What justice is the WTS obstructing? What if your father or your brother was accused of molestation and he was innocent? What if it was a trumped-up charge? The "two or three witnesses" rule might just exonerate his innocence. That is why the Bible gives us this rule, so that an innocent person could not be condemned by just one person.

You ask "how do you know that the WTS disciplines pedophiles?" I have been with the organization for over 42 years. I have seen everything that has gone on within my own congregations (I've been in 5 different ones and have been privy to what goes on in others by close proximity). I have never seen a pedophile protected or shielded from being arrested. One man who was a close family friend spent years in jail, and when he got out he was sorry and got accepted back, but he could never hold any privileges in the congregation, and you'd better believe he would never be allowed to be alone with children any more, not even his own. The only times I have known pedophiles to get away with anything is if either the victims didn't say anything and/or the parents didn't do anything about it and didn't bring it to anyone's attention. A close family member was molested by his JW babysitter when he was little but he never told his parents. He's 46 now and still holds all that inside, no matter that people have told him to tell someone. The only people that know who it could have been are his mother and stepfather, and he never told them. That's really sad, and justice wan't served, but you know?---justice is not served either when a man is disciplined by the congregation and yet other people want to lynch him. He is not getting away with anything.

.

[onewithhim]

three witnesses every matter may be established. If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector."

Where's the part about shunning?

And your question about the empty tomb was answered by me quite awhile ago.


.

Please post again because I did not see it. Please comment on this:

Matthew 28:13


…12After the chief priests had met with the elders and formed a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money 13and instructed them: “You are to say, ‘His disciples came by night and stole His body while we were asleep. 14If this report reaches the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.�…

If His physical body remained and was still there then why suggest the disciples stole it?

It is in my post #549. (Three sentences up from the bottom.) I'll bump it up here after I respond to Matthew 28:13. JWs have never said that Jesus' body was still in the tomb. Please don't post things about somebody that you can't substantiate.


.

If not in the tomb, where was it??

Didn't you read my post that I bumped up just for you?

.

[Claire Evans]

And 144 000 is an occult number.

No it's not. That number can be found in the book of Revelation. It was the number given to John by Jesus Christ through an angel. John then wrote it down in what we know as the book of Revelation.

It appears way before that.

In Tutankhamen's sun necklace, the numbers 144 000 and 666 are encoded.
The carving of Lord Pacal had 144 000 on his forehead encoded also.

https://books.google.co.za/books?id=D3F ... 00&f=false




The book of Revelation starts this way...

"A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent his angel and presented it in signs through him to his slave John." - Revelation 1:1.

Do you disagree that John was writing down a 'revelation by Jesus Christ'?

I believe there are some parts in Revelation is from God but I believe there are some parts that are from Gnostics.

I do not agree with your 'sources' and the Bible is not up for debate. This subfourm is about doctrine based on the Bible not the Bible itself. However there are those that claim that JWs don't follow the Bible. I would like to point out that this is further evidence that Jehovah's Witnesses do in fact follow the Bible where others do not for whatever their reason. When debating with a JW you will find yourself face to face with the choice between a doctrine and the Bible. When a person tosses out the Bible as true and pursues their own doctrine over the Bible, JWs have nothing else debate about. From our point of view, Jehovah's Word the Bible has revealed the person's desire to follow themselves and not His Word the Bible.

You must admit, the origins of the 144 000 is curious. JWs do not agree with the most important part of Christianity and that is the resurrection of Jesus' physical body. You cannot possibly agree with the empty tomb account. Why do JWs disregard that? Can you explain this part of the Bible in Matthew 28:

…12After the chief priests had met with the elders and formed a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money 13and instructed them: “You are to say, ‘His disciples came by night and stole His body while we were asleep. 14If this report reaches the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.�…

What happened to Jesus' body?

The WTS makes up its own rules ironically. They promote shunning when Jesus did not.

Since this is the case, Claire your first issue is with the Bible. Your issues with JWs are secondary because you don't like that we follow the Bible. Because as we just read, you reject some of the Bible. Since JWs base all doctrine on the Bible to the best of our ability, you will never agree with us. So when you accept the whole Bible as God's Word, then we will have something to talk about. Until then, I wish you well.

You reject some of the Bible!

[Claire Evans]

Just so we are clear, by the comment above you agree there are those where 2 John 9-11 should be enforced? It also seems you agree that, like I have been saying this whole time, this 'rejecting' of a person is for more than just making a mistake. It's for serious practiced sin. 2 John 9-11 is not to be applied to those that make a mistake and repent, but must be applied to those that knowingly and willfully go against the example Jesus set without repentance. Don't you agree?

I don't agree nor does Jesus.

Then let this be an example of where Jehovah's Witnesses know and follow the Bible were others don't. Jesus said that those that don't know the scriptures would be in error. Not only that, they don't know the power of God in the scriptures.

"Jesus said to them: “Is not this why you are mistaken, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?" - Mark 12:24

Also, don't be so quick to speak for Jesus. "For the Father judges no one at all, but he has entrusted all the judging to the Son, so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him." John 5:22, 23.

Just who do you think told John to write what he did? Jesus is charge of the congregation. John was simply following Jesus' command to write what he was told to write. The same person that followed Jesus and was God-Inspired to write the Gospel of John also wrote 2 John 9-11.

"Indeed, that is why we also thank God unceasingly, because when you received God’s word, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but, just as it truthfully is, as the word of God, which is also at work in you believers." 1 Thessalonians 2:13.

Now for the question of Evangelicals vs JWs. Shouldn't the true religion follow the commands in the Bible? Like 2 John 9-11.

Shouldn't those belonging to the true religion believe in the empty tomb resurrection account?

JWs do believe in the empty tomb account, and you haven't substantiated your claim that we don't.

Also, we follow the commands in the Bible and you do not. I can say that because you dismiss out-of-hand the admonishment from the Scriptures to disfellowship anyone who practices serious sins.

.

Truly odd. If you believe in the empty tomb account, then you believe Jesus' physical body rose from the dead. What is it now? Just a spiritual resurrection or the resurrection of the body?

Odd? Didn't Paul explain that the physical body CHANGES after one of the anointed dies? Couldn't it very well be that that is what happened to Jesus's physical body?(I Corinthians 15:42-51) I'm sorry, but you always seem to forget what Paul said about bodies in I Corinth. chapter 15. What Paul says there does not agree with what you say about Jesus being resurrected with a physical body. I don't know how it can be explained any better.

.

So now you are back to the spiritual body resurrection and again reject the empty tomb account. Just answer the question yes or no. Do you believe in the empty tomb account which says Jesus' body was missing?

[Claire Evans]

Just so we are clear, by the comment above you agree there are those where 2 John 9-11 should be enforced? It also seems you agree that, like I have been saying this whole time, this 'rejecting' of a person is for more than just making a mistake. It's for serious practiced sin. 2 John 9-11 is not to be applied to those that make a mistake and repent, but must be applied to those that knowingly and willfully go against the example Jesus set without repentance. Don't you agree?

I don't agree nor does Jesus.

Then let this be an example of where Jehovah's Witnesses know and follow the Bible were others don't. Jesus said that those that don't know the scriptures would be in error. Not only that, they don't know the power of God in the scriptures.

"Jesus said to them: “Is not this why you are mistaken, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?" - Mark 12:24

Also, don't be so quick to speak for Jesus. "For the Father judges no one at all, but he has entrusted all the judging to the Son, so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him." John 5:22, 23.

Just who do you think told John to write what he did? Jesus is charge of the congregation. John was simply following Jesus' command to write what he was told to write. The same person that followed Jesus and was God-Inspired to write the Gospel of John also wrote 2 John 9-11.

"Indeed, that is why we also thank God unceasingly, because when you received God’s word, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but, just as it truthfully is, as the word of God, which is also at work in you believers." 1 Thessalonians 2:13.

Now for the question of Evangelicals vs JWs. Shouldn't the true religion follow the commands in the Bible? Like 2 John 9-11.

Shouldn't those belonging to the true religion believe in the empty tomb resurrection account?

Strawman.

You don't agree with John's inspired writings, that is all that matters to me, so if you don't believe John at 2 John 9-11 it's like saying, 'I believe some of John's writings but not his later stuff.' If John is being misleading in any of the scriptures, then why believe in any of his writings? Including the resurrection of Jesus!

What is your aversion about speaking about the empty tomb account? It is the most important part in Christianity, yet you don't agree with it. How can we have a discussion when you dismiss this?