A belief of the Jehovah Witnesses?

polonius · Post by **polonius** » Fri Mar 06, 2020 11:02 am

Garbe, Detlef (2008). Between Resistance and Martyrdom: Jehovah's Witnesses in the Third Reich. University of Wisconsin Press. pp. 37, 38. ISBN 0-299-20794-3.

" In their opinion, only people who have accepted Jehovah and subsequently submit to his requirements will survive Armageddon and enter into the New World ... Jehovah's Witnesses also believe that a person confessing to worship God has to be associated with the true Christian denomination. Since they claim to be the only true religious denomination, they also claim to have the only means for salvation."

Is this a belief that all Jehovah Witnesses hold?

tam · Post by **tam** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 3:37 pm

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:43 pm

[Replying to post 106 by tam]

There is nothing in those that Watchtower that is unscriptural and no amount of anti-biblical twisting can help you in your case. If you don't want to teach baptism in Jesus name or dedication to God that's your business, but you are not the judge if those of us who do, no matter what you think.

DOES TEACHING PEOPLE THE IMPORTANCE OF 1 PETER 3:21 MEAN BELIEVING EVERYONE THAT ISN'T BAPTISED WILL BE KILLED?

No. Teaching people to obey Jesus command is not a judgement on those that either have not had the opportunity or are for whatever reason are not ready to make such a committment. For such people Jesus (as Jehovahs appointed judge) will decide. We JWs tell people what the bible says, including their need to be baptised in obedience to Jesus command, and leave the rest in Gods capable hands.

If you have no confidence that Jesus can judge those both inside and outside his organisation at Armageddon, you can explain that to him when he arrives.

JW

tam · Post by **tam** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:53 pm

Peace to you,

JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 106 by tam]

That is nit what the magasine said and no amount of anti-biblical twisting can help you in your case.

I quoted directly from the magazines, from the wt online library.

If you dont want to teach baptism in Jesus name or dedication to God that's your business but you are not the judge if those of us whomdo no matter what you think

Despite this attempt to try and twist this around onto me, this entire statement is a strawman. I never said or even implied anything like this.

DOES TEACHING PEOPLE THE IMPORTANCE OF 1 PETER 3:21 MEAN BELIEVING EVERYONE THAT ISN'T BAPTISED WILL BE KILLED?

No. Teaching people to obey Jesus command is not a judgement on those that either have not had the opportunity or are for whatever reason are not ready to make such a committment. For such people Jesus (as Jehovahs appointed judge) will decide. We JWs tell people what the bible says, including their need to be baptised in obedience to Jesus command, and leave the rest in Gods capable hands.

One - I never asked the question you have placed in all caps.

Two - Is that from a magazine or is that your opinion? I must ask because you have not linked to an article. I linked to all the articles that I quoted from so you can know that the things I quoted are not my opinion, but rather the teaching of the WTS.

If you have no confidence that Jesus can judge those both inside and outside his organisation at Armageddon, you can explain that to him when he arrives.

Yet another strawman, but see post 106.

Peace still to you.

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:54 pm

[Replying to post 108 by tam]

Yes and I provided scriptural supoort for everything in them. If you want to oppose scripture go ahead and say that Jesus didnt preach baptism in the name of the father, son and holy spirit. But there are many Christians that will point out he did.

As for your implying that preaching baptism for salvation (a good standing before God) means believing every unbaptised person will be killed at Armageddon I think its clear to see for everyone concerned you have never produced anything that even suggests such a thing.

JW

tam · Post by **tam** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:56 pm

Peace to you,

JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 108 by tam]

Yes and I provided scriptural supoort for everything in them.

Yes what?

If you want to oppose scripture go ahead and say that Jesus didnt preach baptism in the name of the father, son and holy spirit. But there are many Christians that will point out he did.

Strawman. Misrepresentation. I never made such a claim and if you say I did, then produce that claim of mine.

As for your implying that preaching baptism for salvation (a good standing before God) means believing every unbaptised person will be killed at Armageddon I think its clear to see for everyone concerned you have never produced anything that even suggests such a thing.

As we conduct Bible studies, we have to try our best to â€œmake disciples . . . , teaching them to observe all the things [Jesus has] commanded.â€� We need to help people understand how important it is for them to take their stand for Jehovah and his Kingdom. This means trying to motivate people to make the truth their own by applying what they learn, dedicating their life to Jehovah, and getting baptized. Only then will they survive Jehovahâ€™s day - the WTS

ONLY THEN.

That does more than just 'suggest' such a thing.

"You must get your driver's license. ONLY THEN will you be permitted to drive a motor vehicle."

"You must get on the ark. ONLY THEN will you survive the flood."

Peace again to you.

JehovahsWitness · Post by **JehovahsWitness** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:57 pm

[Replying to post 110 by tam]

Yes you did quote from them and as I said,there was nothing unscriptural in the quotations . You are trying unsuccessfully to suggest that Peter was not refering to Jehovahs judgement or salvation for those that live to see Jehovahs day, scriptures say differently.

IS IT UNSCRIPTURAL TO SAY BAPTISM SAVES?

1 PETER 3:21 - NWT

Baptism, which corresponds to this is also now saving you (not by the removing of the filth of the flesh, but by the request to God for a good conscience)

This means trying to motivate people to make the truth their own by applying what they learn, dedicating their life to Jehovah, and getting baptized. Only then will they survive Jehovahâ€™s dayâ€‹â€”1 Pet 3:21" -Watchtower Oct 2019 #40 p. 12 par 14

You can insist on your own interpretations of scripture as much as you like but that doesn't mean we have to take ownerhip of them.

JW

RELATED POSTS

Do Jehovahs Witnesses teach that all non-witnesses will be killed at Armagedddon?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 21#1003121

Do Jehovahs witnesses believe JEWS or MUSLIMS who die believing in their religions have no hope of a resurrection?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 30#1003130

WHO do the Witnesses believe will be destroyed at Armageddon?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 98#1003198

tam · Post by **tam** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:02 pm

tam · Post by **tam** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:46 pm

Peace to you,

JehovahsWitness wrote: [Replying to post 110 by tam]

Yes you did quote from them and as I said,there was nothing unscriptural in the quotations . You are trying unsuccessfully to suggest that Peter was not refering to Jehovahs judgement or salvation for those that live to see Jehovahs day, scriptures say differently.
I have no idea what you are trying to say here, never mind trying to suggest it myself.

As to the rest, see my previous post.

onewithhim · Post by **onewithhim** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 11:01 pm

tam wrote: Peace to you,

onewithhim wrote: [Replying to post 75 by tam]

Hey tam.....you went all the way back to 1952 to show what we believe NOW?

I just googled the jw online library, entered 'armageddon' in the search bar, and that was one thing that came up. Like I said, I was surprised.

In 1952 our organization did not have all of its dogmas fixed in stone. Even back in the 1970s the brothers had attitudes about some things that are changed now.
Yes, the WTS is still (to this day) changing things that it has taught. You don't think this is an awful lot of error for a religion that claims to have 'the truth'?

Before 1974 people in the organization could smoke. After that we were taught that smoking was defiling the body, per 2 Corinthians 7:1, and it would be a disfellowshipping offense. We don't think like 1952 anymore, on quite a few issues.
I will suggest (for reasons previously stated) that post-1974 thinking on the matter of smoking and dis-fellowshiping is also an erroneous teaching of the WTS.

And what about the words from Christ:

"Nothing that enters a man from the outside can defile him; but the things that come out of a man, these are what defile him.â€� Mark 7:25

Peace again to you,
- a slave of Christ,
tammy

it's interesting that you don't think that the filthy habit of smoking is defiling to the body. Can you see Jesus or his Apostles smoking? Why wouldn't they?

"Therefore, since we have these promises, beloved ones, let us cleanse ourselves of every defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in God's fear." (2 Corinthians 7:1)

.

tam · Post by **tam** » Wed Mar 11, 2020 8:18 pm

Peace to you, owh,

onewithhim wrote:
tam wrote: Peace to you,

onewithhim wrote: [Replying to post 75 by tam]

Hey tam.....you went all the way back to 1952 to show what we believe NOW?

I just googled the jw online library, entered 'armageddon' in the search bar, and that was one thing that came up. Like I said, I was surprised.

In 1952 our organization did not have all of its dogmas fixed in stone. Even back in the 1970s the brothers had attitudes about some things that are changed now.
Yes, the WTS is still (to this day) changing things that it has taught. You don't think this is an awful lot of error for a religion that claims to have 'the truth'?

Before 1974 people in the organization could smoke. After that we were taught that smoking was defiling the body, per 2 Corinthians 7:1, and it would be a disfellowshipping offense. We don't think like 1952 anymore, on quite a few issues.
I will suggest (for reasons previously stated) that post-1974 thinking on the matter of smoking and dis-fellowshiping is also an erroneous teaching of the WTS.

And what about the words from Christ:

"Nothing that enters a man from the outside can defile him; but the things that come out of a man, these are what defile him.â€� Mark 7:25

Peace again to you,
- a slave of Christ,
tammy
it's interesting that you don't think that the filthy habit of smoking is defiling to the body.

What I think (no, what I KNOW) is that 'the flesh counts for nothing'. I know this is true because Christ said it is true. Just as He said "nothing that enters a man from the outside can defile him."

What I don't understand is why anyone (who claims to be His disciple) would ignore or overlook His words in favor of what (they believe) Paul was saying? Even if Paul had been writing about smoking (I see no evidence of that), what Christ said should come first, should it not? Who are we disciples of?

Smoking does not make a person unclean. It is bad for their bodies, yes, but this is not what defiles a person; this is not what makes a person unclean. Christ told us what makes us unclean:

18But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these things defile a man. 19For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, and slander. 20THESE are what defile a man, but eating with unwashed hands does not defile him.â€�â€¦

The WTS is teaching her members to look at the outside of the cup; at the appearance of cleanliness.

God looks at the inside of the cup.

A person could be physically 'clean' (well groomed, eats and exercises, doesn't smoke, doesn't put any fast food into his body, etc)... and yet that person could still be unclean; defiled. Because of his heart and what comes out of it. Likewise, a person could be a smoker, and yet be clean, because a) Christ makes them clean; and/or b) because of what comes out of their heart... and LOVE covers over a multitude of sins.

Christ said to the Pharisees, "Go and learn what this means: I desire mercy, not sacrifice." He also said to them that if they had known what it meant that God desires mercy, not sacrifice, they would not have condemned the innocent.

viewtopic.php?t=31022&start=0&postdays= ... highlight=

Peace again to you, and to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy (the only editing done was to fix the quote marks)