Shiwiii

On 2/27/2016 at 7:46 PM, The Librarian said:

In 1930 Christ's return and "presence" was switched from 1874 to 1914.

"Switched" equals new light? If something is true, then it should stay true. 

On 2/27/2016 at 7:46 PM, The Librarian said:

In The Golden Age magazine (1930 p.503) Joseph Rutherford, the second president of the WTS, wrote "Jesus has been present since 1914" but he gave no supporting explanation.

There is usually no scriptural support for a lot of things given by the WTS. 

On 2/27/2016 at 7:46 PM, The Librarian said:

In 1932: The prophecy of the Bible, fully supported by the physical facts in fulfilment thereof, shows that the second coming of Christ dates from the fall of the year 1914. (What is Truth? 1932)

There are no physical facts that fulfill the second coming, at least not yet. 

Interesting that the WT kept changing this but no one saw it. I mean this should be a major red flag to those who truly want to stick to the Bible. Didn't Jesus tell us that false Christs and false prophets  would come and that they would say that Jesus would be out in the desert/wilderness or in the inner rooms? Does this not parallel the invisible proclamation of the WTS? If they said "He was in the wilderness" you could not see that from where they told you, like wise if "He is in the inner rooms", well again cannot be seen from where you were told.   

On 3/14/2016 at 5:36 AM, gfnslave said:

Thank you for your input. I appreciate your use of Scripture to interpret Scripture. It seems a generation is not as long as some think.

What part of Ann's comment was scripture?  

I find no scriptural support for the thought. Without that, then it is only man's speculation. 

Thank you. That's enough of a response.  I mean it is only the recognition of the anniversary of my birth. 

41 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

More doctrinal changes have happened in the last 10 years than have happened since 1929 in this Organization.

and here is the point I was trying to make as well. God's word does not change, it is man's interpretation that does. It is man's law, which is not sanctioned by God, that is condemning. When one allows men to rule and reign over their lives as if God Himself dictated it, then you have these problems of constant changing doctrines and man made rules to follow. This really is the core of the problem. There is a vast difference between those who lead and those who impose. A leader has gained respect by not an iron fist of rules and regulations, but rather a gentle and humble approach and willingness to come along side and work with you. Those who impose their belief are dictators, and this seldom leads to genuine respect, but rather conformity. It is take what we give and like it. One must conform or find themselves on the outside, outside of what? The box they allowed themselves to be put in. 

I truly appreciate this discussion and your input. 

JW Insider,

I agree with your thoughts. I see that you have thought this through and looked at it from a bigger perspective than just adherence. The idea of adding additional rules and "laws" to separate a group has been around since the Pharisees. If we look at the additional laws Jews put upon themselves in regards to the Sabbath, we can easily see why and how this tradition becomes a burden and a stumbling block. I have no problem with a group not celebrating an event such as birthdays, but I do have a problem when it is expressed as a biblical teaching. You and I both know that it is not. 

As far as the society becoming mainstream, isn't that already in motion? Wasn't it just a few years ago that the internet was to be avoided, but now it is accepted but only under certain rules established by the society themselves? I'm not trying to derail the conversation, just making a point that you brought up. My point is that the society has created their own rules/laws just as the Jews did. That's fine, but don't proclaim it is biblical. 

We can learn a lot from looking at things from a global perspective. What I mean is your example of the people in Vietnam, and how they live on so little, but yet we in western countries throw away our resources. It is a shame and we ought to think about how spoiled we really are. The western world will never take this into consideration, it is only a few small groups who try and do anything about it, but it should be on our minds. 

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

We should continue to rethink our position on all our teachings, constantly making sure of the more important things and holding fast to what is fine.

I agree, however is this for the individual witness or are they to "wait on Jehovah"? You see this comment IS biblical from both Acts 17:11 and 2 Corinthians 13:5. The problem being that within the organization, this is not allowed to the individual witness, but rather the society. It is "wait on Jehovah" to correct the GB, but that is the problem of following men instead of God. God's word does not change, it is men and their interpretation that changes. Those that follow men and end up dying before the change takes place, what happens to them? are they posthumously acquitted and no longer disfellowshipped? wouldn't make much difference then though. 

In the end, I think we are more in agreement than not. I just can't see how anyone or any group can proclaim a biblical teaching that is not one and hold it so dear when it is the thoughts of men.

20 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

 I don't need to convince you of anything. 

11 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Again, matter of your opinion at this point in time,

If you noticed the WT publications and THEIR interpretation, then you can clearly see what I am talking about. I don't need to convince you of anything. You can bury your head in the sand and ignore it, but the fact of the matter is that the society is doing exactly what they have preached is wrong. It is not a matter of which cross, or who's meaning of it is. It is the fact that the logo has been plastered not only on buildings, but shirts, pins and the like to the point that it is a symbol that is an object of intense devotion.

You have made my point. There is no sound reason, nor biblical reason for the adherence of not celebrating a birthday. It was only to distinguish the group from what others have done. To make the group different.

you are missing the point here. I have asked a question. please read it and answer. This is intended for Anke Adolphi. 

it is worship of the ORG.  plain and simple. even under the Organizations own definition. 

i'm sorry if you cannot see the difference between what the WT says and what logic tells you. it is measurable and on the same level. 

6 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

..so these pins are no longer used. 

Oh but they are, and even more so than the cross and crown, they are being peddled as adornments, with bags and t-shirts and pins, etc.

5 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

As for this portion of your comment, my response to the question is quite simply No!

I see many wearing crosses today either as jewelry or body art  who see it purely as a decorative item. Some of them are professed atheists.

I myself wore a cross as a piece of jewelry long before I became a Christian. Worship of it was the furthest thing from my mind at that time.

 

ok, well that doesn't make you right or wrong.

harmless exactly.......what did a birthday have to do with a beheading????? was it not the action outside of the actual ritual? 

6 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

The two bible accounts describing executions carried out coincidentally with the birthday celebrations of non-worshipers of Jehovah are not the measuring stick for the appropriateness of such celebrations by true Christians in modern times.

So the conclusion drawn that a seemingly harmless activity (Ish-bosheth's nap), accompanied by an evil event (Ish-bosheth's murder), renders that harmless activity evil by association is invalid. Ish-bosheth was murdered because he was Saul's son, not because he was asleep.

ask yourself this: 

Is Jesus a true God or a false God? 

Is Jesus a God like Moses or not?

Is Jesus a God like Satan or not? 

Was Moses a real God? or like a god?

Is Satan A real true God or not? 

What Is Jesus? A true God or not? If true then what do you make of Isaiah 43:10?

According to WT belief John 1:1 , Jesus is a true God but not God Almighty.

What then do you make of Isiah 43:10? 

NO OTHER GOD!

17 hours ago, Anke Adolphi said:

Jesus  maybe  was  another  kind  of  God.... 

I have a question then, If Jesus is another kind of God, then what do you make of Isaiah 43:10? 

"Before Me there was no God formed and there will be none after Me"

I see that you'd rather discuss this portion of my comment than the context of my statement.

Reasoning book:

"Cross

Definition: The device on which Jesus Christ was executed is referred to by most of Christendom as a cross. The expression is drawn from the Latin crux.

What were the historical origins of Christendom’s cross?"

God's Kindgom Rules! Page 103:

Should Christians Use the Cross?
12 For many years, the Bible Students viewed the cross
as an acceptable symbol of Christianity.

Further in the God's Kingdom Rules! book on page 104, 

"Yet, at first, the Bible
Students saw no objection to what they thought were appropriate
uses of the cross. For example, they proudly wore
a cross-and-crown pin as an identifying badge."

Is this not going on today with the new logo? I see it displayed and up for sale on pins and socks, bags and shirts. 

On 3/1/2016 at 9:22 AM, JW Insider said:

Of course, the primary reason we give is that the Bible only mentions two birthday celebrations and they were both by wicked pagans who also happened to suborn a murder on their birthday.

I know the usual answer of being that two birthdays were mentioned and each time someone was killed/beheaded, and I am not picking this out of your response as your main point. I am just familiar with this reasoning and If this is the measuring stick, then it stands to reason that taking a nap in the afternoon is also evil. According to 2 Samuel 4:5-7, Ish-bosheth was taking an afternoon nap and was beheaded.

2 minutes ago, Eoin Joyce said:

If this is a question, then No.

That very well may be your answer, but it is still on the same level as described by the Reasoning book. 

I noticed in the links that Eoin Joyce provided,  the Bible references never mention a tattoo in them. It did give reference to obeying your parents (Colossians 3:20), which I can see that, but no mention of not getting a tattoo once an adult.

1 Peter 3:3&4, these are speaking about a wife and how she should be submissive to their husband throughout the first 6 verses. In fact it is specifically addressed in verse 5. Again, nothing about tattoo's. This applies also to 1 Timothy 2:9 as it is stated again about submissiveness and reinforced at verse 11.

Romans 12:1, this is the only verse that can actually pertain to the subject, however it still does not mention tattoo's. Romans 12:1&2 speak to us about how we are to live in these bodies as a living sacrifice, acceptable to God. We are to live for God, this would apply to smoking, drinking in excess, fornication, slandering and even over eating as these have been mentioned in other scriptures, but does it really apply to tattoo's? I think not. 

There is only one mention of tattoo's in the Bible. Leviticus 19:28. However, the WT accepts that this is not binding to anyone but the Jews. 

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/bible-say-about-tattoos/#?insight[search_id]=aa3524b3-b921-40f1-b8fd-549dc406c9c3&insight[search_result_index]=1

" While the Law given to Israel is not binding on Christians, the principle underpinning this law is worth serious consideration. "

Worth consideration does not equate to absolute NO. 

This logo is tied to the organization as a cross is to Christians? 

Interesting subject really, i mean when one sees a person wearing a cross around their neck, it is assumed that they "worship" it. Isn't that true? But now with this logo the same is not applied? 

------Reasoning from the scriptures------

Is veneration of the cross a Scriptural practice?

1 Cor. 10:14: “My beloved ones, flee from idolatry.” (An idol is an image or symbol that is an object of intense devotion, veneration, or worship.)