Jesus.defender

On ‎4‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 3:28 PM, Gregorio Alberto said:

I didn't write this. This is taken from http://aservantofjehovah.blogspot.com/2016/04/on-false-prophets-and-false-accusers-ii.html?m=1

Suppose I had access to everything you had done or said since you were a little child, stored on a computer.  It would be a simple matter for me to pick out a hundred or two hundred of the worst things you’d said and done over the course of your life, to write them up in a list with dates, times and places and then to proclaim, in the same way as a correspondent did in one of his emails to me: “The question is not what you have got wrong, but whether you got anything right.”  On the other hand, by a similar process of selecting the 100-200 kindest, most generous, loving things you’d done, I could equally make you look like a saint.  Both pictures would be true in a sense, but neither would be the whole truth.  Why is this important?

The WatchtowerIn the last 125 years, Jehovah’s Witnesses have published literally millions of words in publications such as The Watchtower.  This includes powerful arguments against atheism and the theory of evolution, eloquent defences of the Bible as the inspired word of God, articles upholding the Bible’s stance on moral issues such as abortion, fornication, adultery and homosexual lifestyles.  Watchtower publications have long exhorted their readers to display Christian qualities and imitate Jesus.  They have shown how applying the Bible’s counsel can benefit family life.  Through  The Watchtower, millions of people have been comforted by the Bible’s message of hope.

You might expect that evangelical Christian organizations would happily applaud most of the above.  After all, evangelical Christians believe in God and reject evolution, consider the Bible to be God’s inspired word, oppose sexual sins and abortion.  They, too, speak of the need to imitate Jesus and display Christlike qualities.  You would expect, then, that evangelical Christian groups could find a lot of positive things to say about The Watchtower.  You’d think they’d congratulate Jehovah’s Witnesses for energetically spreading the above-mentioned views              throughout the world and in literally hundreds of languages.  But you would be wildly wrong.

An analysis of quotations from The Watchtower and other Jehovah’s Witness publications made by evangelical Christian writers - particularly on the Internet, but also in print - reveals that, far from commending Witness literature for all the positive material they publish, these writers consistently attack Jehovah’s Witnesses and actively seek anything that could possibly be used to discredit them - including many things published more than 100 years ago!

You could compare their attitude with that of a man who visits one of the world’s most beautiful cities - say Vienna.  Instead of touring the most attractive parts of the city, though, this man visits the Municipal Garbage Dump and photographs the rubbish there.  Then he goes to the industrial area and photographs the factories.    Everywhere he goes he looks for the ugliest, most sordid parts of the city.  Making copious use of close-ups to highlight the least attractive parts and using the most unflattering camera angles, he ensures his pictures give the worst possible impression.  Then, on his return home, he shows the photographs to his friends, to convince them that Vienna is the most awful city in the world.

In resorting to similar tactics, critics of Witness publications immediately reveal their bias.  The Watchtower Society is their ideological opponent, to be defeated at all costs.  They comb through old Watchtowers, going back as far as 130 years.  They take whatever suits their purpose and ignore the rest.  They rip quotes out of their context, attempting to make it look as though they say much more than they actually meant.  Why do they do it?  They do it because it is their job to do it!  In short, they are far from being an objective source of information.

Frankly, few Jehovah's Witnesses are likely to be taken in by such chicanery.  It is easy to detect an agenda behind this type of mudslinging.  Just about anyone who wanted to believe it has already done so.  And as for the rest of us, what hasn't killed us has made us stronger.

But we should not reject a person’s criticism simply because we feel it is wrongly motivated.  Prejudiced and hate-filled people can sometimes be at least partially right.  As Christians, we should be discerning, remembering the admonition of the proverb, “anyone inexperienced puts faith in every word.”  (Proverbs 14:15)  With that in mind, let us examine the assertions commonly made in anti-Witness literature concerning the Witnesses’ alleged “false prophecies”.

Taken Out of Context

 We have not the gift of prophecy 

Zion's Watch Tower, July 1883.

The standard technique of critics appears to be to present a list of alleged “false prophecies”, the  longer the better.  There are dozens of such lists on the Internet.  These take the form of quotations from The Watchtower and other Witness publications.

Whereas the majority of the quotes themselves are accurate, the context in which they were presented - both the immediate context of the printed page and the historical context - is omitted.  Selective quotations ensure that anything that gives the impression of certainty is usually included, whereas any cautionary statements are omitted.

We are not for a moment denying that the publications - in particular the earlier ones -  have at times published information that was speculative in nature and turned out to be mistaken.  But the fact is that, for each of the dates commonly touted by critics as ‘false prophecies’ (1874, 1914, 1925, 1975), Watch Tower publications had published cautionary statements to the effect that it was by no means certain what would happen.  Consider, for example, the following statements, which emphasise that the basis for the conclusions was Bible study not some message from God:[1]

With regard to 1874:  It should be noted that ‘The Watchtower’ was not published until 1879 and Russell himself did not become aware of the 1874 date until 1876!  So it was hardly a matter of a failed prediction. 

With regard to 1914: :  "We are not prophesying; we are merely giving our surmises . . . We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology. We have merely laid these before you, leaving it for each to exercise his own faith or doubt in respect to them" (emphasis added).[2]

With regard to 1925: "The year 1925 is here. With great expectation Christians have looked forward to this year. Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people. Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year."[3]

With regard to 1975: ‘What about the year 1975? What is it going to mean, dear friends?’ asked Brother Franz. ‘Does it mean that Armageddon is going to be finished, with Satan bound, by 1975? It could! It could! All things are possible with God. Does it mean that Babylon the Great is going to go down by 1975? It could. Does it mean that the attack of Gog of Magog is going to be made on Jehovah’s witnesses to wipe them out, then Gog himself will be put out of action? It could. But we are not saying. All things are possible with God. But we are not saying. And don’t any of you be specific in saying anything that is going to happen between now and 1975.[4]

Charles Taze RussellIt’s obvious, therefore, that the situation was by no means as clear-cut as Watchtower opposers would have us believe.  By omitting these more cautionary statements, many of which are in the same articles as the quotations they like to print, enemies of Jehovah’s Witnesses give a misleading picture of events and endeavour to make a suggested interpretation look like a prophecy.

No Claim of Inspiration

Not to be overlooked is the larger context of the role of the Watch Tower publications.  Whereas Watchtower writers undoubtedly pray for God’s blessing on their work and sincerely believe that God answers these prayers, they make no pretensions of being inspired, infallible or perfect.  Consider the following extracts from Watch Tower publications, which prove that this is the case.  (This is just a small selection of examples.  Many more could be cited, but care has been taken to include at least one example for every decade since The Watchtower began to be published.)

1870s: We do not object to changing our opinions on any subject, or discarding former applications of prophecy, or any other scripture, when we see a good reason for the change,—in fact, it is important that we should be willing to unlearn errors and mere traditions, as to learn truth.... It is our duty to "prove all things."—by the unerring Word,—"and hold fast to that which is good."

1880s: “We have not the gift of prophecy.”[5]

 We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology.

Zion's Watch Tower, 1908

1890s: Nor would we have our writings reverenced or regarded as infallible, or on a par with the holy Scriptures. The most we claim or have ever claimed for our teachings is that they are what we believe to be harmonious interpretations of the divine Word, in harmony with the spirit of the truth. And we still urge, as in the past, that each reader study the subjects we present in the light of the Scriptures, proving all things by the Scriptures, accepting what they see to be thus approved, and rejecting all else. It is to this end, to enable the student to trace the subject in the divinely inspired Record, that we so freely intersperse both quotations and citations of the Scriptures upon which to build.[6]

1900s:  It is not our intention to enter upon the role of prophet to any degree, but merely to give below what seems to us rather likely to be the trend of events—giving also the reasons for our expectations.[7]

Someone may ask, Do you, then, claim infallibility and that every sentence appearing in "The Watch Tower" publications is stated with absolute correctness? Assuredly we make no such claim and have never made such a claim. What motive can our opponents have in so charging against us? Are they not seeking to set up a falsehood to give themselves excuse for making attacks and to endeavor to pervert the judgments of others?[8]

1910s:  However, we should not denounce those who in a proper spirit express their dissent in respect to the date mentioned [1914] and what may there be expected . . . We must admit that there are possibilities of our having made a mistake in respect to the chronology, even though we do not see where any mistake has been made in calculating the seven times of the Gentiles as expiring about October 1, 1914.[9]

1920s: Many students have made the grievous mistake of thinking that God has inspired men to interpret prophecy. The holy prophets of the Old Testament were inspired by Jehovah to write as his power moved upon them. The writers of the New Testament were clothed with certain power and authority to write as the Lord directed them. However, since the days of the apostles no man on earth has been inspired to write prophecy, nor has any man been inspired to interpret prophecy.[10]

1930s: We are not a prophet; we merely believe that we have come to the place where the Gentile times have ended[11]

1940s: This pouring out of God's spirit upon the flesh of all his faithful anointed witnesses does not mean those now serving as Jehovah's Witnesses are inspired. It does not mean that the writings in this magazine The Watchtower are inspired and infallible and without mistakes. It does not mean that the president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society is inspired and infallible, although enemies falsely charge us with believing so.... But we confess with the Scriptures that the day of such inspiration passed long before 1870, as the apostle Paul showed it would. . . . Inspired speaking and writing passed away with the last of the twelve apostles, by whom the gifts of the spirit were imparted to others. Yet God is still able to teach and lead us. While confessing no inspiration for today for anyone on earth, we do have the privilege of praying God for more of his holy spirit and for his guidance of us by the bestowal of his spirit through Jesus Christ.[12]

1950s: The Watchtower does not claim to be inspired in its utterances,nor is it dogmatic. It invites careful and critical examination of its contents in the light of the Scriptures.[13]

1960s: The book [Life Everlasting in Freedom of Sons of God] merely presents the chronology. You can accept it or reject it[14]

Our chronology, however, ... is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible)[15]

 Don't any of you be specific in saying anything that is going to happen between now and 1975

F. W. Franz, quoted in The Watchtower, 15 October 1966, page 231.

1970s: In this regard, however, it must be observed that this “faithful and discreet slave” was never inspired, never perfect. Those writings by certain members of the “slave” class that came to form the Christian part of God’s Word were inspired and infallible, but that is not true of other writings since. Things published were not perfect in the days of Charles Taze Russell, first president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society; nor were they perfect in the days of J. F. Rutherford, the succeeding president. The increasing light on God’s Word as well as the facts of history have repeatedly required that adjustments of one kind or another be made down to the very present time.[16]

1980s: It is not claimed that the explanations in this publication are infallible. Like Joseph of old, we say: “Do not interpretations belong to God?” (Genesis 40:8) At the same time, however, we firmly believe that the explanations set forth herein harmonize with the Bible in its entirety, showing how remarkably divine prophecy has been fulfilled in the world events of our catastrophic times.[17]

1990s: Those who make up the one true Christian organization today do not have angelic revelations or divine inspiration. But they do have the inspired Holy Scriptures, which contain revelations of God’s thinking and will. As an organization and individually, they must accept the Bible as divine truth, study it carefully, and let it work in them.[18]

2000s: Although the slave class is defined as “faithful and discreet,” Jesus did not say that it would be infallible. This group of faithful anointed brothers still consists of imperfect Christians. Even with the best of intentions, they can be mistaken, as such men sometimes were in the first century.[19]

It’s therefore quite clear that Jehovah’s Witnesses make no claim to divine inspiration for their publications.  Thus, the critics' assertion that “the Watch Tower claims to be an inspired prophet” is manifestly false. 

Did Haydon Covington concede that the Watch Tower is a False Prophet?

Did Haydon Covington concede in the Walsh trial that the Watch Tower Society has promulgated false prophecy, as is stated by critics?  Even if he had done so, what would that have proved?  If Covington had said that the thought the Society was a false prophet, then he would have been mistaken, that is all.  However, a look at the court record (even as it is quoted on anti-Witness web pages) shows that Covington did nothing of the sort. 

 Critics' allegations that 'The Watchtower claims to be an inspired prophet' are manifestly false

The court records show that Covington said: “I do not think we have promulgated false prophecy ... there have been statements that were erroneous, that is the way I put it, and mistaken.”  When asked hypothetically if it would have been a false prophecy if the Society had authoritatively promulgated 1874 as the date for the return of Christ’s coming, Covington himself pointed out that this was only an assumption, and is then is recorded as having said the words “I agree that”.  This is an incomplete sentence in English.  Now it could very well be that he was interrupted and was not intending to agree that a false prophecy had been made.  If we take the court to read “I agree to that”, he was simply agreeing hypothetically that the Society would have been guilty of false prophecy under a certain set of circumstances, namely if it had promulgated as authoritative that Christ returned in 1874.  Now the records show that Covington had not studied the Society’s literature relating to 1874, saying “you are speaking of a matter that I know nothing of.”  So, Covington’s comments, viewed in their proper context do not prove the point Witness critics are trying to make.  Covington certainly did not mean that the Society was responsible for a false prophecy, as he had just a few moments earlier stated the very opposite.   And as we have seen, the Society did not ‘authoritatively promulgate’ 1874 as the date, it merely presented it to its readers to decide for themselves.

Of course, Witnesses do believe that God is using them - and their publications - to accomplish his work.  But that is not the same as believing that God personally directs the writing of Watchtower Publications in the way that he inspired the Bible.  The above quotations - and many others - show that at no time in the history of the organization has it claimed to be God’s prophet, inspired or infallible.[20]

It is evident here that critics are setting up a straw man argument.  In other words, they are imputing to Watch Tower a position that it does not claim for itself and then refuting that position, instead of the Society’s actual position.  This is really nothing but a dishonest debating trick.

Thus, the Watch Tower quotations, taken in context and stripped of all hyperbole and rhetoric, establish basically one thing only: that Watch Tower publications have on a number of occasions presented interpretations of Bible prophecies which later turned out to be incorrect.  It is not possible to argue on the basis of the Watchtower literature that (1) the Society claims that its literature is inspired of God or infallible, (2) that it claimed to speak in the name of God as a prophet.

Admittedly, it would certainly have been better for all concerned had the publications refrained from publishing such speculative interpretations, which doubtless led to disappointment for many.  ‘The Watchtower’, far from covering over these facts, has admitted openly that this is the case, as is seen from the following extract from The Watchtower.

In its issue of July 15, 1976, The Watchtower, commenting on the inadvisability of setting our              sights on a certain date, stated: “If anyone has been disappointed through not following this line of thought, he should now concentrate on adjusting his viewpoint, seeing that it was not the word of God that failed or deceived him and brought disappointment, but that his own understanding was based on wrong premises.” In saying “anyone,” The Watchtower included all disappointed ones of Jehovah’s Witnesses, hence including persons having to do with the publication of the information that contributed to the buildup of hopes centered on that date.[21]

Thus the Watch Tower Society has recognised that it was a mistake to speculate.  But was it the only ever religious organization to make such a mistake?

Double Standards and Bigotry

If Jehovah’s Witnesses have had mistaken expectations about the fulfillment of Bible prophecies, they are far from alone.  Many other students of the Bible - including some highly respected Catholic and Protestant writers - have made similar mistakes to Jehovah’s Witnesses.  Whole books have been written on the subject of predictions that failed to come true, but let’s look at just three examples from the world of Protestantism: Martin Luther, John Wesley and Billy Graham.

Protestant leader Martin Luther, believed that the end would come in his day.  He believed theMartin Luther Turkish war would be "the final wrath of God, in which the world will come to an end and Christ will come to destroy Gog and Magog and set free His own"?[22] and that "Christ has given a sign by which one can know when the Judgment Day is near. When the Turk will have an end, we can certainly predict that the Judgment must be at the door"[23]

John WesleyMethodist founder John Wesley wrote: "1836 The end of the non-chronos, and of the many kings; the fulfilling of the word, and of the mystery of God; the repentance of the survivors in the great city; the end of the 'little time,' and of the three times and a half; the destruction of the east; the imprisonment of Satan."[24]

In 1950, Billy Graham, the well-known US evangelist, told a rally in LosBilly GrahamAngeles: “I sincerely believe that the Lord draweth nigh.  We may have another year, maybe two years, to work for Jesus Christ, and, Ladies and Gentlemen, I believe it is all going to be over ... two years and it’s all going to be over.”[25]

If it had been Jehovah’s Witnesses who had said the things that Luther, Wesley and Graham proclaimed, these proclamations would have been added to the list of quotations supposedly proving McLoughlin, William G., 1978 Revivals, Awakenings and Reform. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. pp.185.that the Witnesses are false prophets.  Unsurprisingly, however, the sources that attack the Witnesses for false prophecy do not generally take the same position when it comes to Protestant figures who have made very similar errors.

This should give all of us food for thought.  If a newspaper editor were to publish in his paper all the crimes committed by members of just one ethnic group or race, dwelling on them in great detail, even repeatedly bringing up very old offences, but at the same time, ignoring all the crimes committed by members of another group (perhaps his own), then thinking people who looked at the facts would conclude that he was nothing but a bigot. What are we to think, then, when certain ones opposed to Jehovah’s Witnesses constantly harp on what they incorrectly and maliciously term “false prophecies” of the organization, reproducing ad nauseam the same quotations from Watch Tower literature, the majority of which were published almost 100 years ago, while remaining deadly silent about all similar errors by those who share their theological convictions?  Is the word ‘bigoted’ any less appropriate?  At any rate, their agenda is obvious and respect for the truth is not high on their list of priorities.

 Were Martin Luther, John Wesley and Billy Graham false prophets?

I do not think that the comments of Luther, Wesley or Graham make them false prophets, for the same reason that I don’t accept that the Watch Tower is a false prophet, namely, that interpreting Bible prophecy is not the same as prophesying.

Prophecy and Interpretation

It is true that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe they are being guided by God.  But, ‘guidance’ is a much broader concept than ‘inspiration’.  True, inspiration is a form of guidance, but it is only one form.   In this regard, Stafford makes a very telling point:

It cannot truthfully be said that to be inspired by God to produce flawless information is the same as being guided or lead by a flawless source, whether that source be the Scriptures or an angel sent by God. Why? Because in the former case the person is taken over by God, given a vision, revelation (sometimes in a dream), or put into a trance. The person then receives God's thoughts and will which are then channelled through the individual, providing information he or she would otherwise not have known. However, in the latter case one could simply misunderstand or ignore the directions given, which would make the accuracy of what they do or say dependent upon whether or not they correctly understood the inspired source.[26]

“Prophecy” involves much more than simply predicting the future.  It involves claiming to have a message directly from God.  It is not the same as interpreting events or even interpreting the prophetic parts of the Bible.  Russell understood this and that is why he said: “The most we claim or have ever claimed for our teachings is that they are what we believe to be harmonious interpretations of the divine Word, in harmony with the spirit of the truth”, adding “we are far from claiming any direct plenary inspiration”[27]

 The Watch Tower Society is not a false prophet, for the simple reason that it is not a prophet. 

Similarly, when Wesley drew the conclusion that the end would come in 1836, he did so on the basis of his understanding of the Bible.  Of course, this understanding turned out to be completely and utterly wrong, but that does not make him a false prophet.  When Billy Graham stated in 1950 that the end would come within two years, he was not claiming that God had personally spoken to him through a dream or a vision.  He was just stating what he believed after comparing world events with what he knew from the Bible.  No charitable person would accuse Graham of being a false prophet because of that (although it is obvious that he did make an error of judgment).  Likewise, when Luther stated that the Turkish war would lead to the end of the world, he was woefully mistaken, but that certainly does not make him a false prophet.  Incidentally, Luther, on the basis of his understanding of the Bible, also contradicted Copernicus and insisted that the earth was the centre of the universe! [28]

Thus, the Watch Tower Society is not a false prophet, for the simple reason that it is not a prophet.  It makes no claim that any of its members have heard voices from God,  seen visions or in any other way been directly influenced to make a certain proclamation beyond what is in the Bible.  It has made mistakes in explaining or interpreting parts of the Bible, but as we have seen, so have other religious organizations.

Conclusion

On the basis of the above, critics of Jehovah's Witnesses have some questions to answer:

(1) Do they think it is truthful and fair to focus on a minute selection of the Watch Tower’s published material - the most negative part - and ignore everything else?

(2) Can they cite the Watch Tower publication where the Society claims to be an “inspired prophet” (their expression, not ours).  On what do they base that conclusion, and how do they explain the dozens of quotations I have presented from the Society’s literature - from all periods of its history - where the Society denies that?[29]

(3) Why do they present the Watchtower’s statements about future events as prophetic statements, rather than what they really were - interpretations?

(4) Do they believe that others who have had mistaken expectations, including Martin Luther, John Wesley and Billy Graham, are false prophets, and if not, why not?

Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that they should be above honest criticism and have not hidden the fact that they have made errors in their interpretations.  But honest criticism implies respect for truth - the whole truth, not just extracts taken out of context and twisted to give an impression that they were never intended to give.

Beware of half truths.  You might end up believing the wrong half!

Footnotes and References

[1]  I am grateful to other Witness writers for bringing many of these citations to my attention.  Additionally, the book Jehovah’s Witnesses Defended, Second Edition [JWD2] by Greg Stafford contains extensive research on this matter.  Quotations from publications after 1950 are generally taken from the Watchtower Library 2003 CD-ROM.  Almost all Russell’s writings are freely available on the Internet.

[2]  Zion's Watch Tower, January 1, 1908 (reprint) page 4110

[3]  The Watch Tower, January 1, 1925, page 3.

[4]  The Watchtower, 15 October 1966, page 631.

[5]  Zion’s Watch Tower, January 1883, page 425.

[6]  Zion 's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 December 1896, reprint, 2080 (emphasis added).

[7]  "Views From the Watch Tower," Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 1 March 1904, reprint, 3327 (emphasis added).

[8]  Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 September 1909, reprint, 4473.

[9]  The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 November 1913, repr. 5348 (emphasis added).

[10]  Prophecy (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1929), 61-62 (emphasis added).

[11]  Light, vol. 1 (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1930), 194 (emphasis added).

[12]  The Watchtower, 15 May 1947, pp. 157-8.

[13]  "Name and Purpose of the Watchtower," The Watchtower, 15 August 1950, 262-263 (emphasis added)

[14]  The Watchtower, 15 October 1966, page 631.

[15]  The Watchtower, 15 August 1968, page 499.

[16]  The Watchtower, 1 March 1979, page 23-24.

[17]  Revelation - Its Grand Climax at Hand, page 9. (Published 1988)

[18]  Jehovah’s Witnesses - Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom, page 708 (Published 1993)

[19]  The Watchtower, 1 December 2002, page 17.

[20]  Occasionally, The Watchtower  (for example 1 April 1972) has referred to true Christians (not specifically to the writers of Watch Tower publications) as “prophets”.  However, the word is placed in inverted commas, which shows that it is not meant literally.  The 1972 article is simply drawing parallels between experiences in the life of the prophet Ezekiel and those of Christians today as they fulfil Christ’s commission to preach to all the nations.  This sense of the word ‘prophecy’ is recognised by many ‘mainstream’ Christians., Billy Graham’s biography is called “A prophet with Honor” .  Pope John Paul II spoke  of ‘the ‘prophetic office’ of the People of God - meaning their responsibility to give a Christian witness. (http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0264of.htm) In view of other comments (cited in the main article) in which the Society specifically repudiates prophet status, both before and after this article was published, attempts to use this article to demonstrate that the Watch Tower Society claims to be an inspired prophet are obviously misrepresenting the sense of the article.

[21] The Watchtower, 15 March 1980, page 17-18.

[22]  John T. Baldwin, "Luther's Eschatological Appraisal of the Turkish Threat in Eine Heerpredigt -wider den Tuerken [Army Sermon Against the Turks],"Andrews University Seminary Studies 33.2 (Autumn 1995), 196.

[23]  Ibid, p. 201.

[24] http://www.ccel.org/ccel/wesley/notes.i.xxviii.xxiii.html

[25]  McLoughlin, William G., 1978 Revivals, Awakenings and Reform. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. pp.185.  See also “US News and World Report” (December 19, 1994)

[26] Jehovah’s Witnesses Defended, Second Edition, pp. 462-3.

[27]  Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 July 1899, reprint, 2506

[28]  Luther is also quoted on certain websites as having said that Jesus would return 300 years from his time.  (The Familiar Discourses of Dr. Martin Luther, trans. by Henry Bell and revised by Joseph Kerby [London: Baldwin, Craddock and Joy, 1818], pp. 7,8.)  I have not been able to verify this source, although I have no reason to doubt it.

[29] A computer search for the expression “inspired prophet” on the Watchtower 2003 CD-ROM (containing The Watchtower) since 1950 plus most other publications, revealed that the expression came up 44 times. Every single              occurrence was referring to a Bible writer.

please, address just ONE false prophecy.

On ‎4‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 3:28 PM, Gregorio Alberto said:

I didn't write this. This is taken from http://aservantofjehovah.blogspot.com/2016/04/on-false-prophets-and-false-accusers-ii.html?m=1

Suppose I had access to everything you had done or said since you were a little child, stored on a computer.  It would be a simple matter for me to pick out a hundred or two hundred of the worst things you’d said and done over the course of your life, to write them up in a list with dates, times and places and then to proclaim, in the same way as a correspondent did in one of his emails to me: “The question is not what you have got wrong, but whether you got anything right.”  On the other hand, by a similar process of selecting the 100-200 kindest, most generous, loving things you’d done, I could equally make you look like a saint.  Both pictures would be true in a sense, but neither would be the whole truth.  Why is this important?

The WatchtowerIn the last 125 years, Jehovah’s Witnesses have published literally millions of words in publications such as The Watchtower.  This includes powerful arguments against atheism and the theory of evolution, eloquent defences of the Bible as the inspired word of God, articles upholding the Bible’s stance on moral issues such as abortion, fornication, adultery and homosexual lifestyles.  Watchtower publications have long exhorted their readers to display Christian qualities and imitate Jesus.  They have shown how applying the Bible’s counsel can benefit family life.  Through  The Watchtower, millions of people have been comforted by the Bible’s message of hope.

You might expect that evangelical Christian organizations would happily applaud most of the above.  After all, evangelical Christians believe in God and reject evolution, consider the Bible to be God’s inspired word, oppose sexual sins and abortion.  They, too, speak of the need to imitate Jesus and display Christlike qualities.  You would expect, then, that evangelical Christian groups could find a lot of positive things to say about The Watchtower.  You’d think they’d congratulate Jehovah’s Witnesses for energetically spreading the above-mentioned views              throughout the world and in literally hundreds of languages.  But you would be wildly wrong.

An analysis of quotations from The Watchtower and other Jehovah’s Witness publications made by evangelical Christian writers - particularly on the Internet, but also in print - reveals that, far from commending Witness literature for all the positive material they publish, these writers consistently attack Jehovah’s Witnesses and actively seek anything that could possibly be used to discredit them - including many things published more than 100 years ago!

You could compare their attitude with that of a man who visits one of the world’s most beautiful cities - say Vienna.  Instead of touring the most attractive parts of the city, though, this man visits the Municipal Garbage Dump and photographs the rubbish there.  Then he goes to the industrial area and photographs the factories.    Everywhere he goes he looks for the ugliest, most sordid parts of the city.  Making copious use of close-ups to highlight the least attractive parts and using the most unflattering camera angles, he ensures his pictures give the worst possible impression.  Then, on his return home, he shows the photographs to his friends, to convince them that Vienna is the most awful city in the world.

In resorting to similar tactics, critics of Witness publications immediately reveal their bias.  The Watchtower Society is their ideological opponent, to be defeated at all costs.  They comb through old Watchtowers, going back as far as 130 years.  They take whatever suits their purpose and ignore the rest.  They rip quotes out of their context, attempting to make it look as though they say much more than they actually meant.  Why do they do it?  They do it because it is their job to do it!  In short, they are far from being an objective source of information.

Frankly, few Jehovah's Witnesses are likely to be taken in by such chicanery.  It is easy to detect an agenda behind this type of mudslinging.  Just about anyone who wanted to believe it has already done so.  And as for the rest of us, what hasn't killed us has made us stronger.

But we should not reject a person’s criticism simply because we feel it is wrongly motivated.  Prejudiced and hate-filled people can sometimes be at least partially right.  As Christians, we should be discerning, remembering the admonition of the proverb, “anyone inexperienced puts faith in every word.”  (Proverbs 14:15)  With that in mind, let us examine the assertions commonly made in anti-Witness literature concerning the Witnesses’ alleged “false prophecies”.

Taken Out of Context

 We have not the gift of prophecy 

Zion's Watch Tower, July 1883.

The standard technique of critics appears to be to present a list of alleged “false prophecies”, the  longer the better.  There are dozens of such lists on the Internet.  These take the form of quotations from The Watchtower and other Witness publications.

Whereas the majority of the quotes themselves are accurate, the context in which they were presented - both the immediate context of the printed page and the historical context - is omitted.  Selective quotations ensure that anything that gives the impression of certainty is usually included, whereas any cautionary statements are omitted.

We are not for a moment denying that the publications - in particular the earlier ones -  have at times published information that was speculative in nature and turned out to be mistaken.  But the fact is that, for each of the dates commonly touted by critics as ‘false prophecies’ (1874, 1914, 1925, 1975), Watch Tower publications had published cautionary statements to the effect that it was by no means certain what would happen.  Consider, for example, the following statements, which emphasise that the basis for the conclusions was Bible study not some message from God:[1]

With regard to 1874:  It should be noted that ‘The Watchtower’ was not published until 1879 and Russell himself did not become aware of the 1874 date until 1876!  So it was hardly a matter of a failed prediction. 

With regard to 1914: :  "We are not prophesying; we are merely giving our surmises . . . We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology. We have merely laid these before you, leaving it for each to exercise his own faith or doubt in respect to them" (emphasis added).[2]

With regard to 1925: "The year 1925 is here. With great expectation Christians have looked forward to this year. Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people. Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year."[3]

With regard to 1975: ‘What about the year 1975? What is it going to mean, dear friends?’ asked Brother Franz. ‘Does it mean that Armageddon is going to be finished, with Satan bound, by 1975? It could! It could! All things are possible with God. Does it mean that Babylon the Great is going to go down by 1975? It could. Does it mean that the attack of Gog of Magog is going to be made on Jehovah’s witnesses to wipe them out, then Gog himself will be put out of action? It could. But we are not saying. All things are possible with God. But we are not saying. And don’t any of you be specific in saying anything that is going to happen between now and 1975.[4]

Charles Taze RussellIt’s obvious, therefore, that the situation was by no means as clear-cut as Watchtower opposers would have us believe.  By omitting these more cautionary statements, many of which are in the same articles as the quotations they like to print, enemies of Jehovah’s Witnesses give a misleading picture of events and endeavour to make a suggested interpretation look like a prophecy.

No Claim of Inspiration

Not to be overlooked is the larger context of the role of the Watch Tower publications.  Whereas Watchtower writers undoubtedly pray for God’s blessing on their work and sincerely believe that God answers these prayers, they make no pretensions of being inspired, infallible or perfect.  Consider the following extracts from Watch Tower publications, which prove that this is the case.  (This is just a small selection of examples.  Many more could be cited, but care has been taken to include at least one example for every decade since The Watchtower began to be published.)

1870s: We do not object to changing our opinions on any subject, or discarding former applications of prophecy, or any other scripture, when we see a good reason for the change,—in fact, it is important that we should be willing to unlearn errors and mere traditions, as to learn truth.... It is our duty to "prove all things."—by the unerring Word,—"and hold fast to that which is good."

1880s: “We have not the gift of prophecy.”[5]

 We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology.

Zion's Watch Tower, 1908

1890s: Nor would we have our writings reverenced or regarded as infallible, or on a par with the holy Scriptures. The most we claim or have ever claimed for our teachings is that they are what we believe to be harmonious interpretations of the divine Word, in harmony with the spirit of the truth. And we still urge, as in the past, that each reader study the subjects we present in the light of the Scriptures, proving all things by the Scriptures, accepting what they see to be thus approved, and rejecting all else. It is to this end, to enable the student to trace the subject in the divinely inspired Record, that we so freely intersperse both quotations and citations of the Scriptures upon which to build.[6]

1900s:  It is not our intention to enter upon the role of prophet to any degree, but merely to give below what seems to us rather likely to be the trend of events—giving also the reasons for our expectations.[7]

Someone may ask, Do you, then, claim infallibility and that every sentence appearing in "The Watch Tower" publications is stated with absolute correctness? Assuredly we make no such claim and have never made such a claim. What motive can our opponents have in so charging against us? Are they not seeking to set up a falsehood to give themselves excuse for making attacks and to endeavor to pervert the judgments of others?[8]

1910s:  However, we should not denounce those who in a proper spirit express their dissent in respect to the date mentioned [1914] and what may there be expected . . . We must admit that there are possibilities of our having made a mistake in respect to the chronology, even though we do not see where any mistake has been made in calculating the seven times of the Gentiles as expiring about October 1, 1914.[9]

1920s: Many students have made the grievous mistake of thinking that God has inspired men to interpret prophecy. The holy prophets of the Old Testament were inspired by Jehovah to write as his power moved upon them. The writers of the New Testament were clothed with certain power and authority to write as the Lord directed them. However, since the days of the apostles no man on earth has been inspired to write prophecy, nor has any man been inspired to interpret prophecy.[10]

1930s: We are not a prophet; we merely believe that we have come to the place where the Gentile times have ended[11]

1940s: This pouring out of God's spirit upon the flesh of all his faithful anointed witnesses does not mean those now serving as Jehovah's Witnesses are inspired. It does not mean that the writings in this magazine The Watchtower are inspired and infallible and without mistakes. It does not mean that the president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society is inspired and infallible, although enemies falsely charge us with believing so.... But we confess with the Scriptures that the day of such inspiration passed long before 1870, as the apostle Paul showed it would. . . . Inspired speaking and writing passed away with the last of the twelve apostles, by whom the gifts of the spirit were imparted to others. Yet God is still able to teach and lead us. While confessing no inspiration for today for anyone on earth, we do have the privilege of praying God for more of his holy spirit and for his guidance of us by the bestowal of his spirit through Jesus Christ.[12]

1950s: The Watchtower does not claim to be inspired in its utterances,nor is it dogmatic. It invites careful and critical examination of its contents in the light of the Scriptures.[13]

1960s: The book [Life Everlasting in Freedom of Sons of God] merely presents the chronology. You can accept it or reject it[14]

Our chronology, however, ... is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible)[15]

 Don't any of you be specific in saying anything that is going to happen between now and 1975

F. W. Franz, quoted in The Watchtower, 15 October 1966, page 231.

1970s: In this regard, however, it must be observed that this “faithful and discreet slave” was never inspired, never perfect. Those writings by certain members of the “slave” class that came to form the Christian part of God’s Word were inspired and infallible, but that is not true of other writings since. Things published were not perfect in the days of Charles Taze Russell, first president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society; nor were they perfect in the days of J. F. Rutherford, the succeeding president. The increasing light on God’s Word as well as the facts of history have repeatedly required that adjustments of one kind or another be made down to the very present time.[16]

1980s: It is not claimed that the explanations in this publication are infallible. Like Joseph of old, we say: “Do not interpretations belong to God?” (Genesis 40:8) At the same time, however, we firmly believe that the explanations set forth herein harmonize with the Bible in its entirety, showing how remarkably divine prophecy has been fulfilled in the world events of our catastrophic times.[17]

1990s: Those who make up the one true Christian organization today do not have angelic revelations or divine inspiration. But they do have the inspired Holy Scriptures, which contain revelations of God’s thinking and will. As an organization and individually, they must accept the Bible as divine truth, study it carefully, and let it work in them.[18]

2000s: Although the slave class is defined as “faithful and discreet,” Jesus did not say that it would be infallible. This group of faithful anointed brothers still consists of imperfect Christians. Even with the best of intentions, they can be mistaken, as such men sometimes were in the first century.[19]

It’s therefore quite clear that Jehovah’s Witnesses make no claim to divine inspiration for their publications.  Thus, the critics' assertion that “the Watch Tower claims to be an inspired prophet” is manifestly false. 

Did Haydon Covington concede that the Watch Tower is a False Prophet?

Did Haydon Covington concede in the Walsh trial that the Watch Tower Society has promulgated false prophecy, as is stated by critics?  Even if he had done so, what would that have proved?  If Covington had said that the thought the Society was a false prophet, then he would have been mistaken, that is all.  However, a look at the court record (even as it is quoted on anti-Witness web pages) shows that Covington did nothing of the sort. 

 Critics' allegations that 'The Watchtower claims to be an inspired prophet' are manifestly false

The court records show that Covington said: “I do not think we have promulgated false prophecy ... there have been statements that were erroneous, that is the way I put it, and mistaken.”  When asked hypothetically if it would have been a false prophecy if the Society had authoritatively promulgated 1874 as the date for the return of Christ’s coming, Covington himself pointed out that this was only an assumption, and is then is recorded as having said the words “I agree that”.  This is an incomplete sentence in English.  Now it could very well be that he was interrupted and was not intending to agree that a false prophecy had been made.  If we take the court to read “I agree to that”, he was simply agreeing hypothetically that the Society would have been guilty of false prophecy under a certain set of circumstances, namely if it had promulgated as authoritative that Christ returned in 1874.  Now the records show that Covington had not studied the Society’s literature relating to 1874, saying “you are speaking of a matter that I know nothing of.”  So, Covington’s comments, viewed in their proper context do not prove the point Witness critics are trying to make.  Covington certainly did not mean that the Society was responsible for a false prophecy, as he had just a few moments earlier stated the very opposite.   And as we have seen, the Society did not ‘authoritatively promulgate’ 1874 as the date, it merely presented it to its readers to decide for themselves.

Of course, Witnesses do believe that God is using them - and their publications - to accomplish his work.  But that is not the same as believing that God personally directs the writing of Watchtower Publications in the way that he inspired the Bible.  The above quotations - and many others - show that at no time in the history of the organization has it claimed to be God’s prophet, inspired or infallible.[20]

It is evident here that critics are setting up a straw man argument.  In other words, they are imputing to Watch Tower a position that it does not claim for itself and then refuting that position, instead of the Society’s actual position.  This is really nothing but a dishonest debating trick.

Thus, the Watch Tower quotations, taken in context and stripped of all hyperbole and rhetoric, establish basically one thing only: that Watch Tower publications have on a number of occasions presented interpretations of Bible prophecies which later turned out to be incorrect.  It is not possible to argue on the basis of the Watchtower literature that (1) the Society claims that its literature is inspired of God or infallible, (2) that it claimed to speak in the name of God as a prophet.

Admittedly, it would certainly have been better for all concerned had the publications refrained from publishing such speculative interpretations, which doubtless led to disappointment for many.  ‘The Watchtower’, far from covering over these facts, has admitted openly that this is the case, as is seen from the following extract from The Watchtower.

In its issue of July 15, 1976, The Watchtower, commenting on the inadvisability of setting our              sights on a certain date, stated: “If anyone has been disappointed through not following this line of thought, he should now concentrate on adjusting his viewpoint, seeing that it was not the word of God that failed or deceived him and brought disappointment, but that his own understanding was based on wrong premises.” In saying “anyone,” The Watchtower included all disappointed ones of Jehovah’s Witnesses, hence including persons having to do with the publication of the information that contributed to the buildup of hopes centered on that date.[21]

Thus the Watch Tower Society has recognised that it was a mistake to speculate.  But was it the only ever religious organization to make such a mistake?

Double Standards and Bigotry

If Jehovah’s Witnesses have had mistaken expectations about the fulfillment of Bible prophecies, they are far from alone.  Many other students of the Bible - including some highly respected Catholic and Protestant writers - have made similar mistakes to Jehovah’s Witnesses.  Whole books have been written on the subject of predictions that failed to come true, but let’s look at just three examples from the world of Protestantism: Martin Luther, John Wesley and Billy Graham.

Protestant leader Martin Luther, believed that the end would come in his day.  He believed theMartin Luther Turkish war would be "the final wrath of God, in which the world will come to an end and Christ will come to destroy Gog and Magog and set free His own"?[22] and that "Christ has given a sign by which one can know when the Judgment Day is near. When the Turk will have an end, we can certainly predict that the Judgment must be at the door"[23]

John WesleyMethodist founder John Wesley wrote: "1836 The end of the non-chronos, and of the many kings; the fulfilling of the word, and of the mystery of God; the repentance of the survivors in the great city; the end of the 'little time,' and of the three times and a half; the destruction of the east; the imprisonment of Satan."[24]

In 1950, Billy Graham, the well-known US evangelist, told a rally in LosBilly GrahamAngeles: “I sincerely believe that the Lord draweth nigh.  We may have another year, maybe two years, to work for Jesus Christ, and, Ladies and Gentlemen, I believe it is all going to be over ... two years and it’s all going to be over.”[25]

If it had been Jehovah’s Witnesses who had said the things that Luther, Wesley and Graham proclaimed, these proclamations would have been added to the list of quotations supposedly proving McLoughlin, William G., 1978 Revivals, Awakenings and Reform. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. pp.185.that the Witnesses are false prophets.  Unsurprisingly, however, the sources that attack the Witnesses for false prophecy do not generally take the same position when it comes to Protestant figures who have made very similar errors.

This should give all of us food for thought.  If a newspaper editor were to publish in his paper all the crimes committed by members of just one ethnic group or race, dwelling on them in great detail, even repeatedly bringing up very old offences, but at the same time, ignoring all the crimes committed by members of another group (perhaps his own), then thinking people who looked at the facts would conclude that he was nothing but a bigot. What are we to think, then, when certain ones opposed to Jehovah’s Witnesses constantly harp on what they incorrectly and maliciously term “false prophecies” of the organization, reproducing ad nauseam the same quotations from Watch Tower literature, the majority of which were published almost 100 years ago, while remaining deadly silent about all similar errors by those who share their theological convictions?  Is the word ‘bigoted’ any less appropriate?  At any rate, their agenda is obvious and respect for the truth is not high on their list of priorities.

 Were Martin Luther, John Wesley and Billy Graham false prophets?

I do not think that the comments of Luther, Wesley or Graham make them false prophets, for the same reason that I don’t accept that the Watch Tower is a false prophet, namely, that interpreting Bible prophecy is not the same as prophesying.

Prophecy and Interpretation

It is true that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe they are being guided by God.  But, ‘guidance’ is a much broader concept than ‘inspiration’.  True, inspiration is a form of guidance, but it is only one form.   In this regard, Stafford makes a very telling point:

It cannot truthfully be said that to be inspired by God to produce flawless information is the same as being guided or lead by a flawless source, whether that source be the Scriptures or an angel sent by God. Why? Because in the former case the person is taken over by God, given a vision, revelation (sometimes in a dream), or put into a trance. The person then receives God's thoughts and will which are then channelled through the individual, providing information he or she would otherwise not have known. However, in the latter case one could simply misunderstand or ignore the directions given, which would make the accuracy of what they do or say dependent upon whether or not they correctly understood the inspired source.[26]

“Prophecy” involves much more than simply predicting the future.  It involves claiming to have a message directly from God.  It is not the same as interpreting events or even interpreting the prophetic parts of the Bible.  Russell understood this and that is why he said: “The most we claim or have ever claimed for our teachings is that they are what we believe to be harmonious interpretations of the divine Word, in harmony with the spirit of the truth”, adding “we are far from claiming any direct plenary inspiration”[27]

 The Watch Tower Society is not a false prophet, for the simple reason that it is not a prophet. 

Similarly, when Wesley drew the conclusion that the end would come in 1836, he did so on the basis of his understanding of the Bible.  Of course, this understanding turned out to be completely and utterly wrong, but that does not make him a false prophet.  When Billy Graham stated in 1950 that the end would come within two years, he was not claiming that God had personally spoken to him through a dream or a vision.  He was just stating what he believed after comparing world events with what he knew from the Bible.  No charitable person would accuse Graham of being a false prophet because of that (although it is obvious that he did make an error of judgment).  Likewise, when Luther stated that the Turkish war would lead to the end of the world, he was woefully mistaken, but that certainly does not make him a false prophet.  Incidentally, Luther, on the basis of his understanding of the Bible, also contradicted Copernicus and insisted that the earth was the centre of the universe! [28]

Thus, the Watch Tower Society is not a false prophet, for the simple reason that it is not a prophet.  It makes no claim that any of its members have heard voices from God,  seen visions or in any other way been directly influenced to make a certain proclamation beyond what is in the Bible.  It has made mistakes in explaining or interpreting parts of the Bible, but as we have seen, so have other religious organizations.

Conclusion

On the basis of the above, critics of Jehovah's Witnesses have some questions to answer:

(1) Do they think it is truthful and fair to focus on a minute selection of the Watch Tower’s published material - the most negative part - and ignore everything else?

(2) Can they cite the Watch Tower publication where the Society claims to be an “inspired prophet” (their expression, not ours).  On what do they base that conclusion, and how do they explain the dozens of quotations I have presented from the Society’s literature - from all periods of its history - where the Society denies that?[29]

(3) Why do they present the Watchtower’s statements about future events as prophetic statements, rather than what they really were - interpretations?

(4) Do they believe that others who have had mistaken expectations, including Martin Luther, John Wesley and Billy Graham, are false prophets, and if not, why not?

Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that they should be above honest criticism and have not hidden the fact that they have made errors in their interpretations.  But honest criticism implies respect for truth - the whole truth, not just extracts taken out of context and twisted to give an impression that they were never intended to give.

Beware of half truths.  You might end up believing the wrong half!

Footnotes and References

[1]  I am grateful to other Witness writers for bringing many of these citations to my attention.  Additionally, the book Jehovah’s Witnesses Defended, Second Edition [JWD2] by Greg Stafford contains extensive research on this matter.  Quotations from publications after 1950 are generally taken from the Watchtower Library 2003 CD-ROM.  Almost all Russell’s writings are freely available on the Internet.

[2]  Zion's Watch Tower, January 1, 1908 (reprint) page 4110

[3]  The Watch Tower, January 1, 1925, page 3.

[4]  The Watchtower, 15 October 1966, page 631.

[5]  Zion’s Watch Tower, January 1883, page 425.

[6]  Zion 's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 December 1896, reprint, 2080 (emphasis added).

[7]  "Views From the Watch Tower," Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 1 March 1904, reprint, 3327 (emphasis added).

[8]  Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 September 1909, reprint, 4473.

[9]  The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 November 1913, repr. 5348 (emphasis added).

[10]  Prophecy (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1929), 61-62 (emphasis added).

[11]  Light, vol. 1 (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1930), 194 (emphasis added).

[12]  The Watchtower, 15 May 1947, pp. 157-8.

[13]  "Name and Purpose of the Watchtower," The Watchtower, 15 August 1950, 262-263 (emphasis added)

[14]  The Watchtower, 15 October 1966, page 631.

[15]  The Watchtower, 15 August 1968, page 499.

[16]  The Watchtower, 1 March 1979, page 23-24.

[17]  Revelation - Its Grand Climax at Hand, page 9. (Published 1988)

[18]  Jehovah’s Witnesses - Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom, page 708 (Published 1993)

[19]  The Watchtower, 1 December 2002, page 17.

[20]  Occasionally, The Watchtower  (for example 1 April 1972) has referred to true Christians (not specifically to the writers of Watch Tower publications) as “prophets”.  However, the word is placed in inverted commas, which shows that it is not meant literally.  The 1972 article is simply drawing parallels between experiences in the life of the prophet Ezekiel and those of Christians today as they fulfil Christ’s commission to preach to all the nations.  This sense of the word ‘prophecy’ is recognised by many ‘mainstream’ Christians., Billy Graham’s biography is called “A prophet with Honor” .  Pope John Paul II spoke  of ‘the ‘prophetic office’ of the People of God - meaning their responsibility to give a Christian witness. (http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0264of.htm) In view of other comments (cited in the main article) in which the Society specifically repudiates prophet status, both before and after this article was published, attempts to use this article to demonstrate that the Watch Tower Society claims to be an inspired prophet are obviously misrepresenting the sense of the article.

[21] The Watchtower, 15 March 1980, page 17-18.

[22]  John T. Baldwin, "Luther's Eschatological Appraisal of the Turkish Threat in Eine Heerpredigt -wider den Tuerken [Army Sermon Against the Turks],"Andrews University Seminary Studies 33.2 (Autumn 1995), 196.

[23]  Ibid, p. 201.

[24] http://www.ccel.org/ccel/wesley/notes.i.xxviii.xxiii.html

[25]  McLoughlin, William G., 1978 Revivals, Awakenings and Reform. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. pp.185.  See also “US News and World Report” (December 19, 1994)

[26] Jehovah’s Witnesses Defended, Second Edition, pp. 462-3.

[27]  Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 July 1899, reprint, 2506

[28]  Luther is also quoted on certain websites as having said that Jesus would return 300 years from his time.  (The Familiar Discourses of Dr. Martin Luther, trans. by Henry Bell and revised by Joseph Kerby [London: Baldwin, Craddock and Joy, 1818], pp. 7,8.)  I have not been able to verify this source, although I have no reason to doubt it.

[29] A computer search for the expression “inspired prophet” on the Watchtower 2003 CD-ROM (containing The Watchtower) since 1950 plus most other publications, revealed that the expression came up 44 times. Every single              occurrence was referring to a Bible writer.

unbelievable nonsense!

these people never claimed to be prophets!

How typical of Jehovahs witnesses to lie.

On ‎10‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 1:45 PM, Manuel Boyet Enicola said:

If we have to believe everything posted "as is", then that also makes Jonah a false prophet. He prophesied that Niniveh would fall in 40 days and it did not happen.  And also Moses who believed that he was anointed by Jehovah and it was time to liberate Israel from Egypt - only to wait 40 years more....

lol. The context is if ninevah would not repent.

plus, Moses never prophesised whatvu said

BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS

Watchtower Teaching WT forbids blood transfusions because of Genesis 9:4 ‘But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat’.

The WT teaches that a blood transfusion is the same as eating blood, because it resembles intravenous feeding. This doctrine was invented in 1944.

Bible Teaching and Historical facts:
1) Thousands of JWs and their children have died because they followed this WT error.
QUESTION: Would you really allow your baby to die because of this WT instruction?

2) Most JWs are unaware that their leaders have a history of making medical prohibitions,then later changing their minds to allow them. Examples include:

(i) Vaccinations were forbidden by the WT from 1931 to 1952. JWs had to refuse vaccinations because the WT taught that ‘vaccination is a direct violation of the everlasting covenant that God made’ (Golden Age, 4 Feb 1931, p 293).

Awake of 22 Aug 1965 admitted that vaccinations have caused a decrease in diseases(p.20)
QUESTION: How did the parents of children who died from not being vaccinated, feel when the WT reversed its view in 1952? How many of these children died needlessly?

(ii) Organ transplants were allowed by the WT up to 1967, but were forbidden in 1967 saying that ‘organ transplants amounted to cannibalism and are not appropriate for Christians’ (WT, 15 Nov 1967, p 702-4, and Awake 8 June 1968, p 21). Hence all organ
transplants were forbidden for 13 years, during which time many JWs died needlessly.

Then in 1980, the WT changed its mind to allow them saying that ‘organ transplants are not necessarily cannibalistic’ (WT, 15 March 1980, p 31).

(iii) Blood plasma and blood particles were forbidden to be used by JW haemophiliacs (Awake, 22 Feb 1975, p 30). Shortly after, the WT changed its mind to permit certain blood particles to be used, but failed to put it into print for 3 years until 15 June 1978, p
30 (WT). Only those haemophiliacs who phoned WT headquarters from 1975-78 discovered the change. Others were left to suffer and die.
QUESTION: How long before the WT changes its view on blood transfusions?

QUESTION: Why does the WT keep changing its mind on medical issues?

QUESTION: Is it right for an infallible prophet of God organisation (such as the WT claims to be) to keep changing its mind.

(iv) In 1984, they allowed for a bone-marrow transplant. Bone marrow is the very source of blood. However, they would disfellowship you for receiving a bloodtransfusion.

3) In Genesis 9:4 the context is God forbidding the eating of animal blood (as pagans did), not the transfusion of human blood. A blood transfusion is not intravenous feeding, because the blood so given does not function as food. When one gives a transfusion, it is not a loss of life, but a transference of life from one person to another. It replenishes and saves a life.

QUESTION: Since blood is not taken in as food to digest, but as life sustaining fluid, is it not clear that transfusion is different from eating?

4) Leviticus 3:17 ‘You must not eat any fat or any blood at all.’ (NWT)
QUESTION: Why do WT leaders forbid blood transfusions but allow the eating of fat? Why not forbid both? The WT is not consistently interpreting the Bible. Leviticus 17:11,12: ‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood’. Blood transfusion does not function as food, but simply transfers life from one person to another as an act of mercy.

Key: Leviticus 3:17 prohibits eating animal blood, not transfusing human blood.

QUESTION: Where is loss of salvation mentioned in Acts 15:9,11 for receiving a blood transfusion?

Key: Acts 15:28,29. A blood transfusion uses blood for the same purpose that God intended, (as a life-giving agent in the bloodstream). Drinking blood is not God’s intended purpose for
blood

Conclusion: Even though JWs try to support blood transfusions with Scripture, their real reason for believing it is blind obedience to the WT. If the WT organisation lifted its ban on blood transfusions, JWs would freely accept them if needed.

For the WT to admit they were wrong would cause too great a stir in their ranks. Therefore any changes must be presented as ‘new light’ in order to make it appear that ‘Jehovah’ is making the changes, rather than a few men on the governing body.
 

Did Jesus really say He was God?

That’s exactly how Jesus’ original audience seemed to take it when He said, “I and the Father are one.” In fact, the Jews were ready to kill Him right there! Why? “Because you,” they said, “a mere man, claim to be God” (John 10:33).

On another occasion, He used the personal name of Israel’s God–the name revealed to Moses (Exodus 3:14)–to refer to Himself. And He even used the Torah for context, so no one would misunderstand Him: “Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58). This would be about wild as telling a Muslim, “I am your God, Allah.” Don’t try that in Saudi Arabia! It’s no wonder the Jews tried to stone Him to death. That was the exact penalty for blasphemy under the Jewish legal system. It was pretty clear to everyone there  that He was saying, “I am Israel’s God.”

Why Jesus is God? The Apostle Thomas called Jesus God.John 20:27-29: 2. The Apostle Peter called Jesus God.2 Peter 1:1: 3.The Apostle John called Jesus God.John 1:1-3, 4.God the Father called Jesus God.Hebrews 1:8: 5. God the Father called Jesus God. 6.Isaiah the Prophet said the Messiah would be God.Isaiah 9:67. The Jews who crucified Jesus understood Him to be saying that He was equal with God.John 5:18: 8.Jesus called Himself "I AM", the Old Testament name for God (Exodus 3:14).John 8:58-59. 9.Jesus calls Himself "the Alpha and Omega," the title of Almighty God.Revelation 22:12-13. 10. Like God (Gen. 1:1) Jesus created.Colossians 1:16-1711. Like God, Jesus forgives sin.Mark 2:5-7, 10-11:12. Like God, Jesus gives eternal life.John 10:27-28: 13. Like God, Jesus received, receives and will receive worship.Matthew 14:32-33. 14. Jesus said that only God was good; and Jesus was good. John 10:11: "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep."John 10:11: "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep."Jesus was as good as they come. He was "sinless," "holy," "righteous," "innocent," "undefiled," and "separate from sinners." (Hebrews 7:26) That's pretty good! 15. Like God, Jesus can be present in more than one place at the same time.Matthew 18:20: 16. One of Jesus' titles is "God with us."Matthew 1:23. 17. Jesus' blood is called God's blood.Acts 20:28: 18. Jesus has the same nature as God.Hebrews 1:3a: 19. Jesus spoke as God.Jesus did not speak as one of God's prophets: "thus says the Lord," but as God: "I say to you."Matthew 5:27-29. 20. Like God (Psalm 136:3), Jesus is called the Lord of Lords and King of kings.Revelation 17:14. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. ( WHEN WAS GOD PIERCED? ). And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel (means God Among Us). 

John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

John 1:14, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth."

John 8:58 "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." Crossreference with Exodus 3:14 "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you."

John 10:33 "The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God."

John 20:28 "And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God."

Collossians 2:9 "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

Hebrews 1:8 "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: "

Matthew 4:10 "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." Crossreference with Matthew 2:2, Matthew 2:11, Matthew 28:9.

Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." Crossreference with Revelation 1:17 "And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he." and Revelation 1:8 "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty."

2Peter. Jehovah The Father appears.

John 1. Jehovah the son.

John 8:58 Jesus identifies Himself as Jehovah "I Am"

Acts 5. Jehovah the Holy Spirit identified.

1916 "The Bible chronology herein presented shows that the six great 1000 year days beginning with Adam are ended, and that the great 7th Day, the 1000 years of Christ's Reign, began in 1873," (The Time Is at Hand, forward, p. ii).
 

Consider these proofs or arguments for God’s existence:

1. CAUSE AND EFFECT (Cosmological)

Every effect has a cause. The cause is greater than the effect.

“For every house is built by some man; but he that built all things is God”. Hebrews 3:4. The world and the universe are here. This raises the question: “How did it all come into existence?” We know of nothing in this world that has no cause. Thus we must recognise that there is a cause behind this world and the universe.
If the pieces of a watch were shaken up in a can forever, they would never produce a working watch by accident. The fact of a watch’s existence demands that there was a watchmaker who made the watch. Hence there must be an intelligent First Cause (God).

2.     DESIGN PROVES THE EXISTENCE OF A DESIGNER (Teleological) 

    Not only does the world and universe exist (with a cause), but it also has a perfect design and purpose. Everything has a purpose. For example, every part of your body has a useful purpose. 

    Order and useful arrangement imply that the Cause has intelligence and purpose. The intelligence, purpose and harmony in the universe prove the existence of a master architect. “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handiwork”. Psalm 19:1. 

    God’s purpose, design, harmony and intelligence is seen in: 

1.     The earth is the right distance from the sun to provide a life-sustaining climate on earth. 
2.     The moon is the right distance from earth to provide tides at a proper level. 
3.     Without a moon, we would have no light at night. 
4.     Every plant, animal and bacteria has a useful purpose. 
5.     Every part of your body is in the right place (eg: eyes, nose, ears), is the right size and shape (eg: thumb, fingers), and works perfectly to achieve a useful purpose. 
6.     Flowers are colourful. Trees provide oxygen, shade, and timber for building and heating, they prevent soil erosion, and they support many life forms. 

7.     How can these be explained? A benevolent Designer has given us all of these blessings because He loves and cares for us. Do you love and care for Him? 

8.     The human body functions so perfectly in every way. 

9.     “I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made”. Psalm 139:14. 

3.     The UNIQUENESS and INTELLIGENCE OF MAN (Anthropological) 

    Man is vastly superior to animals, because of his intelligence, his engineering skill, his moral awareness and his awareness of God and eternity. 
    “So God created man in his own image”. Genesis 1:27. 

4.     MAN’S UNIVERSAL INTUITIVE BELIEF IN GOD (Ontological) 

    Man everywhere is born with an intuitive belief in God. This manifests itself in a desire to worship God. If man does not find the true God, he worships a God of his own making. Belief in God is intuitive. It is not the result of cultural conditioning. 

5.     THE MORAL ARGUMENT (Conscience) 

    Man everywhere has a moral awareness of right and wrong. He feels responsible to do what is right, and to avoid what is wrong. 

    Question: Where did this sense of moral justice come from? 

    If man is only a bunch of chemicals, why does he have a sense of moral obligation? Do chemicals have morality? 

    Answer: The Bible states that moral awareness is God given. Such innate moral standards cannot be due to evolution from unintelligent matter. Romans 2:14,15 states that Gentiles who don’t know the 10 Commandments have an inner, moral witness placed there by God. When a man violates his conscience he feels guilt and a fear of punishment. Man’s moral awareness can be traced back to the moral values of his Creator. Man’s conscience witnesses to the existence of a supreme Law-Giver and Judge who built this sense of right and wrong into man. 

6.     THE BIOLOGICAL ARGUMENT 

    Only life can produce life. The theory of spontaneous generation of life has been proven false by science. (Louis Pasteur 1870). Unintelligent matter cannot produce intelligent life. The eternal, intelligent life source is God. “For with thee is the fountain of life”. Psalm 36:9. 

7.     THE HISTORICAL ARGUMENT 

    Human history points to the unseen Hand of God. God controls, guides and governs the affairs of nations. Examples of God intervening in history are: 
i)     When Hitler and Napoleon invaded Russia, winter came early, and was so severe that it led to their defeat. Job 38:22,23. 
ii)     When Hitler had crippled England’s airforce, he could have easily invaded and conquered Britain. But he delayed and was distracted to bombing English cities. He lost his moment of opportunity due to the prayer answering God. 

iii)     When the Spanish Armada set out to invade England in 1588 with 130 ships, God sent a devastating storm which was timed perfectly to destroy most of the ships. God spared England for Protestantism, publishing of the King James Bible in 1611, and sending gospel preaching missionaries all over the world. 
iv)     The allies and the United States developed the atomic bomb before Hitler in World War II. 
v)     Roman peace had removed pirates from the seas allowing Paul and early missionaries to plant churches all over the world. 
vi)     In 1453 the Moslems captured Constantinople. Just before it fell, all the precious New Testament manuscripts had been taken to Europe where printing had just been invented in 1440 by Gutenberg. Hence God preserved the New Testament manuscripts from Islamic destruction, and to be printed 10 years after printing was invented. 
vii)     La Perouse was a French explorer who sailed into Botany Bay only 6 days after Arthur Phillip arrived there with the First Fleet.God wanted England to colonise Australia rather than France. 

viii)     Men blasphemed God in 1912 by saying that “Not even God could sink the Titanic ocean liner.” God judged their sin by sinking the Titanic on its maiden voyage from England to New York on April 15, 1912 when it struck an iceberg. 

8.     THE CHRISTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT 

    We cannot explain the Christ of history without the existence of God. Christ’s life is affirmed by the Bible and by secular literature. Christ’s virgin birth, sinless life, miracles, teachings, prophecies fulfilled at His death, His bodily resurrection and ascension can only be explained by God’s existence. “Never man spake like this man”. John 7:46. 
    How Christ transforms lives for good, and continues to answer prayers is proof of God’s existence. Millions of Christians world wide know Christ as God personally. 

9.     THE BIBLICAL ARGUMENT 

    Man could not have authored the Bible. We know that the Bible is authored by God because it foretells the future with 100% accuracy every time. No other book in the world has 100% fulfilled prophecy. This shows that it comes from the mind of God. Man would not write a book about how his God whom he loves and worships gets crucified. Man would teach that we get to God by our good works. The Bible is accurate from Science, Archaeology, Prophecy, Unity and Morality. 

10.     MILLIONS OF PEOPLE KNOW GOD PERSONALLY THROUGH JESUS CHRIST 

    Jesus Christ has answered millions of people’s prayers and transformed millions of lives from misery, sin and despair to love, joy, peace, hope and victory. Do not be like the fool who says that there is no God. Receive Jesus Christ as your God and Saviour from sin today. Then you too will know God personally. 
 

In 2001, while he was a cardinal, the pope issued a secret Vatican edict to Catholic bishops all over the world, instructing them to put the Church's interests ahead of child safety.   The document recommended that rather than reporting sexual abuse to the relevant legal authorities, bishops should encourage the victim, witnesses and perpetrator not to talk about it. And, to keep victims quiet, it threatened that if they repeat the allegations they would be excommunicated.

The main problem here is that the roman catholic "church" is one of the only organizations that has offered peverts of every stripe and pedophiles in particular a career, protection and access to children. Over time this has led to more and more perverts being attracted to the Church.

"The real problem the Catholic Church faces," explains Father Donald B. Cozzens, author of "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," is the "disproportionate number of gay men that populate our seminaries." "I think we have to ask the question: Why are 90 to 95 – and some estimates say as high as 98 – percent of the victims of clergy acting out against teen-agers, boys? Why isn't there ... a higher percentage of teen-age girls?" Cozzens declared on NBC's Meet the Press recently.

January 31, 2000 | CNN KANSAS CITY, Missouri (AP) -- Roman Catholic priests in the United States are dying from AIDS-related illnesses at a rate four times higher than the general population and the cause is often concealed on their death certificates, The Kansas City Star reported in a series of stories that started Sunday.

WE ARE NOT TALKING NUMBERS, BUT ORDERS FROM THE CATHOLIC ORGANISATION TO COVER UP AND HIDE THEM!
 

A study of the New Testament reveals that ALL Christians are priests. Peter said,"Be you yourselves as living stones, built thereon into a spiritual house,a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." (1 Pet. 2:5).Thus,all Christians are of that holy priesthood and can offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.There is not a man or group of men on earth who can offer unto God spiritual sacrifices for others.

ALL Christians have the right to go to God through Jesus Christ, our High priest (Heb. 4:14-16). There is no priesthood on earth that has the right to forbid each Christian to go directly to God through Christ, or to assume the authority to administer graces and obtain mercy for others.
 

The Book of Mormon predicts that the Lamanites (American Indians) would soon change to white skin colour.

“Many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people.” 2 Nephi 30:6.
Dark skinned Mormon Indians have never become lightened due to their holding Mormon doctrines. Indian murals show Indians of 4 skin colours, all living peaceably.
Question: If the light skinned Nephites were wiped out in 421 AD as the Book of Mormon claims, why are both light and dark skinned Indians portrayed in later wall paintings at Bonampak and Chichen-Itza?

The Book of Mormon is wrong on Indian warfare.

It is mostly a book of wars, oppression, slavery, treachery and bloodshed. The writer has an obsession with warfare and killing, with killings starting from Chapter 4. Weapons used from 544 BC to 52 BC (p107-359) are listed as bows and arrows, steel swords, axes, brass and copper breastplates, shields, horses and chariots, and cimiters.

Question: What is wrong with this picture? Almost everything.
The author knew almost nothing about early American life, lack of warfare, and politics. Early Americans from 600 BC to 421 AD had very little interest in war, and had no occasion for war because:

a) They spent most of their time farming.
b) They had no great cities of great population as are mentioned in the Book of Mormon.
c) Mongoloids have a different philosophy of life and war than Europeans and Semites.
d) Early Americans knew nothing of iron and steel for swords, until the Spaniards came.
e) Breastplates of brass and copper were unknown then.
f) Cimeters were curved swords used by Persians, Arabs and Turks, only appearing 1000 years later (1400 AD).
g) Arm shields and axes of metal were not yet invented in America.
h) The earliest metals in America were gold beads dated 600 AD. Copper, bronze, and silver came much later, when smelting was invented.
i) Horses and chariots were not used in America before the Spanish conquest.
j) The wheel was never used in America before the Europeans came. Roads were pedestrian roads approaching the temples, and were not built in the Book of Mormon period
k) The sinewed bow and arrow of the American Indians came 600 years later, after 421 AD. They instead used an atlatl, or throwing stick.
l) Wars of conquest were unknown because the gaining of new territory for occupation was unnecessary, as there was plenty of room for all Indians.

The Book of Mormon forgets that glass windows were not invented in 2200 BC at the Tower of Babel.

(The first glass vessels were invented around 1500BC in Egypt. The
first window glass was invented around 50AD. World Book Encyclopedia.
Jared and others supposedly migrate from Mesopotamia to America when the Tower of Babel was built. For light in their boats, God was supposed to have given them luminous stones.
“For, behold, ye cannot have windows, for they will be dashed in pieces.” Ether 2:23.
Smith did not know that the Phoenicians had not yet invented glass.
Amazingly, 50-80 people sailed for 344 days, without any loss of life, or running short of food.

Darkness covered the whole earth at Christ’s crucifixion for 3 hours (Matthew 27:45 and Mark 15:33), but the Book of Mormon mistakes it to be 3 days (Helamen 14:20,27).

Many earthquakes with great destruction and loss of life supposedly accompanied Christ’s death, to show God’s displeasure. Mormons claim that this took place in Yucatan in Mexico.

This is an area of flat jungle on limestone, which has been free from earthquakes. Ruins here date from 150 AD or later, not before. What is wrong with this passage?

a) Jesus rebuked James and John for wanting to call down fire from heaven to destroy the scoffing Samaritans.
b) The inhabitants of America were no greater sinners than the chief priests who demanded Christ’s death. Christ did not curse them, but prayed for their forgiveness.
c) Calvary was an act of mercy, not of destruction. No one died in the Jerusalem earthquake, nor when the temple veil was torn. So why should many people die in America who were not responsible for Christ’s death? 3 Nephi 8:1-24.
d) Christ came to save men’s lives, not destroy them. Smith never understood God’s mercy and grace to man at Calvary.

How can Helaman 12:26, supposedly written in 6 BC, quote John 5:29 which was not yet written until 85 AD? You cannot quote something that is not yet written.

“fulfilling the words which say: They that have done good shall receive everlasting life; and they that have done evil shall have everlasting damnation.” Helaman 12:26 in 6 BC.
It is obvious that this is a great mistake, proving the Book of Mormon to be a fake, made up by someone who did not know his facts, and who was given to lying. John 5:29 quotes: “And shall come forth: they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that
have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”

QUESTION:: Does this verse teach salvation by good works?

Answer: No, because John’s theology forbids this (3:17-21; 6:28,29). It states that those who are truly born again will live a life of good works after salvation. They obey Christ (14:15), they abide in Christ (15:5-7), and they walk in the light (John 8:12). Damnation is
because of rejecting Christ (John 3:36).

Of the 38 cities in the Book of Mormon, leading archaeologists have not found any remains of any of these alleged cities.

The Smithsonian Institute in Washington states:
“There is no correspondence whatever between archaeological sites and cultures as revealed by scientific investigations, and as recorded in the Book of Mormon... Thus far no iron, steel, brass, gold and silver coins, metal, swords, breastplates, arm shields,
armour, horses and chariots, or silk have ever been found in pre-colonial archaeological sites.” Kingdom of the Cults, W. Martin, p.162.

The testimony of the 3 witnesses which appears at the front of the Book of Mormon (Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris)

... declares that: “an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engraving thereon...” Martin Harris denied to Professor Anthon that he had actually seen the plates, but that he only saw them “with the eye of faith.”

Note: All three of these witnesses later apostasized from the Mormon faith, and were described by Mormon contemporaries as thieves and counterfeiters.

Joseph Smith lied to try and prove the book of mormon
Joseph Smith, in an effort to prove the Book of Mormon, claimed in the “Pearl of Great Price” Section 2, verses 62, 63, 64, that Professor Charles Anthon verified the “reformed Egyptian language.” 

Smith allegedly quotes Professor Anthon as follows:

“Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated, and he said that they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac and Arabic and he said that they were true characters”.

This later proved to be a TOTAL LIE, as Professor Anthon wrote in a letter to E.D. Howe, that he NEVER SAID ANY SUCH THING.

Mormons have NEVER been able to refute this letter or ANY of
Howe’s research. An excerpt from Professor Anthon’s letter of rebuttal is as follows:

New York, N.Y., Feb. 17, 1834
Mr E.D. Howe
Painseville, Ohio
Dear Sir,
... The whole story about my having pronounced the Mormonite inscription to be “reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics” is perfectly false...
Yours respectfully,
Charles Anthon, LL.D. Columbia University.

All reputable linguists who have examined the Mormon evidence have rejected it as mythical.

Mormon misunderstanding of the Sticks of Joseph and Judah in Ezekiel 37:15-23.

Mormons claim that the “stick of Judah” refers to the Bible, and the “stick of Ephraim” refers to the Book of Mormon. They claim that the joining of the 2 sticks refers to the union of the Bible and the Book of Mormon as an addition to the Word of God.

Answer: The subject under discussion is not books, but people and nations. It refers to the then divided nation of Israel (587 BC) of the northern and southern kingdoms becoming reunited as one nation in the land, just before and after Christ’s second coming.
“These bones are the whole house of Israel”. Ezekiel 37:11.
The 2 sticks becoming one stick in Ezekiel’s hand represent Judah (2 1/2 tribes) and Israel (9 1/2 tribes) being united in the end days.
“I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, ... and bring them into their own land: I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel,.....they shall be no more 2 nations”. Ezekiel 37:21,22.  The Mormon view totally ignores the context, hoping no one will read the passage too carefully.

There are no rivers emptying into the Red Sea.

“... When he had travelled three days in the wilderness, he pitched his tent in a valley by the side of a river of water.... He called the name of the river Laman, and it emptied into the Red Sea; and the valley was in the border near the mouth thereof.” I Nephi 2:4-9.

a) It would have been impossible for an old man (Lehi), women and children to travel the 175 mile journey from Jerusalem to the Red Sea in 3 days.

Question: Could you walk 58 miles per day for 3 days? Travelling 3 miles per hour, you would need to travel for 20 hours each day non-stop for 3 days. This would have been quite impossible.

b) There are no rivers running into the Red Sea along their route, the eastern shore of the Gulf of Aqaba, at this or any other point. There are not even any traceable ancient river systems in this part of Arabia. This part of the world was well known and well travelled in
600 BC. Had there been a river as Nephi describes, the area would have been one of the best known in the world of its day. It would have supported a sizeably populated civilization, as always happened where fresh water was available. The mouth of such a
river would have been a world-renowned port, if not a capital city, in 600 BC.

c) These 6 people then cross 1400 miles of the Arabian peninsula, 400 miles being rugged mountains and 1000 miles of desert.

d) They find a bountiful, fruitful land on the Persian Gulf. Alexander’s troops in 330 BC avoided this as desert area.

e) They then build a ship sufficiently seaworthy to carry them two-thirds around the world in rough seas to the west coast of America, now known as Peru.

American Indians are Mongoloids from East Asia, not Semites from Jerusalem as the Book of Mormon claims.

For 200 years before 1820, many philosophers thought that the American Indians were the lost tribes of Israel. The dark skin of the Indians is not caused by their bad morals, as the Book of Mormon claims, but by genetics. American Indians are Mongoloid, not Jewish, because:

a) Mongoloids lack face and body hair, (growing at most 3 inches of beard in a lifetime), but Jews have much face and body hair.
b) Mongoloid hair is coarse, black & straight, but Jewish Semite hair is moderately fine, wavy and brown.
c) Mongoloids have reddish skin pigmentation, but Jewish Semites have an olive-gray pigmentation.
d) Mongoloids have prominent cheek bones, not like Semites.
e) Mongoloids appear slant-eyed, but Semites have deep seated eyes.
f) Mongoloid babies have a Mongolian spot on their backs. This is a slate-blue round pigment spot that disappears after a few months or years. It is not present on the backs of Jewish or Semite babies.
Hence American Indians could not descend from Jews. Mormons must defend their prophet even if they have to close their eyes to do so.

No coinage system was ever developed in ancient America.

If the alleged ‘Nephites’ were descended from Jews raised in Jerusalem, their coinage and money values would have survived to the New World. Hence Joseph Smith created a system of coinage for people of the Book of Mormon in America. It seems strange that
Smith did not continue using Jewish shekels and talents, but that he devised coins such as senines, seons, shums and limnals of gold.
Unfortunately for Smith, while his guess was logical, it was completely wrong. No system of coinage was ever developed by ancient Americans.

The Mayans who traded had:
a) No money transactions in their records.
b) Their coins would have been discovered in their graves and homes.
c) No coins were found in sacred wells, where so many valuable ornaments and jewels were thrown as offerings to their gods.
d) All the known Mayan media of exchange have been identified, both of their own land, and also along the ancient trade routes of Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean Sea, but never have they found metallic money.
e) Columbus was told by a Mayan chieftain in 1502 that all transactions were by barter.
f) Interregional markets were found at Xicalenco, a market town between Aztec and Mayan populations, where Aztec, Mayan, Toltec, Mixtec and Totocan peoples met. Surely if there had been a coined money system it would have been found here.
g) Cacao beans came closest to a standardised medium of exchange for uneven barter.
h) Taxation had no metal coinage, but was a work service.

Question: Why did they have no coinage?

Answer: Because they had no metal until gold was discovered after 600 AD. Gold was used only for ornamentation. Silver was discovered around 900 AD.
There never was an iron age in America before Columbus. In spite of this, Joseph Smith had his ancient Nephites and Lamanites using iron and steel swords. Iron was the scarcest and most valuable metal. Gold was the most plentiful and cheapest metal.

Silk and fine linen have never been successfully grown in America.

Joseph Smith has Alma, a judge of the Nephites in 100 BC, stating that his people possessed “an abundance of silk and fine twined linen, and all manner of good homely cloth.” Alma 1:29.
Smith was wrong here because:
a) Silk was unknown in the Americas until the Europeans came, and that it has never been successfully introduced since then.
b) Cortez tried to grow silk in Mexico in 1522, but the industry died out 75 years later. Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 1959 ed. XX, 664.
c) James I of England in 1609 tried to introduce silk culture in the American colonies, but failed.
d) Silk still has to be imported to the US from the Orient.
e) In Alma 17:25-33, Ammon protects King Lamoni’s flocks from attackers. This is wrong because there were no domestic sheep in America before the Spanish came (Morley, The Ancient Maya, p.408). Central America and southern Mexico never have been
suitable for raising sheep. Sheep could not thrive in jungle country.
Indians wore fabric of rabbit hair, birds’ feathers &Kapok tree. Joseph Smith’s failure to mention these, and his mention of materials totally unknown in any early American period, proves that the Book of Mormon was written by a completely uninformed scribe who knew
nothing of life in Ancient America.

Impossibility of churches, temples and synagogues in America from 539 BC-34AD

a) The Book of Mormon mentions “synagogues” at least 12 times. Alma 16:13 speaks of synagogues “built after the manner of the Jews”. They date synagogues from 559 BC to 34 AD. Nephi and his successors in America could have known nothing of synagogues.
Why?
Because synagogues were founded after the Temple’s destruction in 586 BC, when Temple worship was an impossibility because Jews were in Babylonian exile. Nephi would never have seen a synagogue in Israel.
b) II Nephi 5:16 tells us that Nephi built a temple “after the manner of the temple of Solomon”, not more than 20 years after the migrant party landed in America between 588-570 BC. What is wrong with this?
i) They didn’t have enough workers. In I Kings 5:13-18 Solomon needed 183,300 workers (made up of 70,000 labourers + 80,000 stone quarriers, 3300 supervisors + 30,000 loggers) over 7 1/2 years, to build his temple. Yet Nephi had only about 12 adults, because half the company had apostasized. Five couples could not produce more than 50 children in 20 years. It would have been impossible for Nephi, with 5 men’s help, to construct a building requiring many specialised skills.
ii) There could be no practical use for it, because the population was so small (about 20). Solomon’s temple served a nation of several million worshippers.
iii) II Nephi 5:15 says that materials “were in great abundance”.
This contradicts v.16 which says that the materials were ‘not to be found upon the land’.
“And I, Nephi, did build a temple; ... after the manner of the temple of Solomon, save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land...” v.16.
Here Joseph Smith tripped badly, because he has Nephi saying in the previous verse: “And I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores
which were in great abundance.” II Nephi 5:15.

Note: At this same time Smith has Nephi making swords of steel, long before the invention of steel anywhere in the world, to arm his soldiers against about 40 of his brother brother’s people.
 

Does the book of mormon compliment the Bible, or contradict it?

The Bible says that Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Matthew 2:1). However, the Book of Mormon reads: “And behold, he shall be born of Mary at Jerusalem” (Alma 7:10). The writer of the Book of Mormon simply did not have his facts straight. The common Mormon explanation for this is that since Jerusalem was so close to Bethlehem, it could be said he was born there. However, in the Bible,
prophets of God did not make it a practice of just being “close” in their predictions. God would not have made such a mistake.

The Bible relates that at the crucifixion there were three hours of darkness (Luke 23:44). However, the Book of Mormon states there was darkness “for the space of three days” (Helaman 14:20,27). Of course, this is a big difference. Which one is true? Can God be responsible for conflicting statements such as these?

The Book of Mormon relates that at the tower of Babel the Jaredites had their separate language (Esther 1:34-35). The Bible, however, plainly states that “the whole earth was of one language” (Genesis 11:1). Apparently, the writer of the Book of Mormon mistakenly thought there were many different languages and that God confounded them while sparing the language of the Jaredites. The
fact is, there was only one language and God confounded the people by creating different languages.

3 Nephi 11:8-10 claims that after Jesus ascended to heaven, He appeared in America to the Lamanites and Nephites in A.D. 34. However, this clearly contradicts the Bible. Of the ascension of Christ to heaven God said, “Sit thou on my right hand until I make thy foes thy footstools” (Acts 2:34-35).
How long was He to be in heaven at God’s right hand? “For he must reign, until he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Corinthians 15:25-26). Furthermore, in referring to the ascension, the Bible speaks of Christ as He “whom the heavens must receive until the restitution of all things” (Acts 3:21). Christ did not come to America—because He has been in heaven since His ascension.

In the Bible, the name “Jesus” was announced first by an angel (to Mary; Luke 1:31). This was in 1 B.C. However, Alma 19:29, dated in the Book of Mormon at 90 B.C., has a woman speaking to the Lord and calling him “Jesus.” Which account is accurate?

The Bible teaches that the church was established on the Day of Pentecost following the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2), which would have been approximately A.D. 33. However, Mosiah 18:17, dated at 145 B.C., has the church already in existence. This represents quite a discrepancy, to say the least. Obviously, both cannot be correct. [NOTE: This same reference from Mosiah also mentions “baptism” as the means of being added to the church. However, according to the Bible the baptism taught by Christ did not begin until New Testament times (Matthew 28: 19).]

The Bible clearly reveals that the disciples of Christ “were called Christians first in Antioch” (Acts 11:26). This was approximately A.D. 40. However, Alma 46:13,15, dated at 73 B.C., has people already wearing the name “Christian”—which represents a difference of over 100 years. Which account are people to believe?

The Book of Mormon teaches that “Melchizedek...did reign under his father” (Alma 13:18). Yet the Bible reveals that Melchizedek was a priest under no one. His priesthood typified the priesthood of Christ, and therefore was unique. In contrast to the Book of Mormon, the Bible states that Melchizedek
was “without father, without mother, without descent”—emphasizing that he did not inherit his priesthood (Hebrews 7:3). The writer of the Book of Mormon did not know his Bible very well.

Ether 3:8-9 speaks of God having “flesh and blood.” Yet the Bible states clearly that God is a “spirit,” and thus does not possess a material body (John 4:24). In Doctrine and Covenants, another allegedly inspired writing of the Mormon church, Joseph Smith wrote: “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s” (section 130:22). The Bible and the Book of Mormon both
cannot be correct on this point.

Mosiah 2:3 states: “And they also took of the firstlings of their flocks, that they might offer sacrifice and burnt offerings, according to the law of Moses.” This represents a blatant contradiction with the Bible, because the firstlings of the flocks were to be reserved for the Lord and given to the priests. They were never used for sacrifice (see Exodus 13:2,12; 22:29-30; Numbers 3:13; 18:15-18; 2 Samuel
24:24).

3 Nephi 18:28-29 speaks of those who are “unworthy” to partake of the communion, and suggests that such people should be forbidden to partake. This is an obvious reference to Paul’s discussion in 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 (in fact, the Book of Mormon has a footnote to that effect). The application made here, however, shows that the writer of the Book of Mormon did not understand what Paul was saying, and as a result ended up with a serious misinterpretation. Paul was not discussing man’s personal worthiness, or lack thereof. Rather, he was discussing the manner in which the communion was being partaken. The context makes this clear. The word “unworthily” is an adverb of manner, and points to the way or manner in which a thing is done. The church at Corinth was abusing the
communion in the manner they were observing it by turning it into a common meal. The American Standard Version evokes the correct idea by employing the phrase, “in an unworthy manner.” By misinterpreting the word “unworthy,” the writer unknowingly demonstrated that his work was manmade.

It makes sense that if the translator of the Book of Mormon was guided by God, the volume would not contain such conspicuous contradictions with the Bible. Modern Mormon leaders claim that in the translation process, all mistakes were corrected as they were detected. This implies, then, that God somehow
must have failed to detect these mistakes—a position that impugns the nature and integrity of God.

Changes in the Book of Mormon, the most correctED book in the world!

1 Nephi

1830: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of God.
Now: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son God. 11:18
1830: Behold, the Lamb of God, yea, even the Eternal Father! 
Now: Behold, the Lamb of God, yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father! 11:21
1830: yea, the everlasting God was judged of the world 
Now: yea, the Son of the everlasting God was judged of the world 11:32
1830: and Jesus Christ, which is the Lamb of God 
Now: and the Messiah, which is the Lamb of God 12:18
(This was changed to avoid contradicting 2 Nephi 10:3, which first reveals to Nephi the name of Christ.)
1830: ...the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father... 
Now: ...the Lamb of God is the son of the Eternal Father... 13:40
1830: ...and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the Lord... 
Now: ...are come forth out of the waters of Judah, or out of the waters of baptism, who swear by the name of the Lord...20:1
2 Nephi

First appearance of the word "Christ" in the modern BoM. "Christ" appeared earlier (1 Nephi 12:18) in the 1 830 edition, but was changed to "Messiah" to avoid contradicting this verse. 10:3
1830: seraphims 
Now: seraphim 
The 1830 edition copied the KJV error in the plural of seraph. 16:2, 6
1830: Wo me! 
Now: Wo is unto me! 16:5 
The omitted italicized word "is" was later corrected.
1830: Here I; send me. 
Now: Here I am; send me. 16:8 
The omitted italicized word "am" was later corrected.
1830: ...they shall be a white and delightsome people... 
Now: ...they shall be a pure and delightsome people.... 30:6 
"White" was changed to "delightsome" to try to soften the obvious racism of this prophecy.
Mosiah

1830 version: "...that king Benjamin had a gift from God..." 
Now: "...that king Mosiah had a gift from God..." 21:28
Since King Benjamin was dead at the time, this change was needed to avoid the obvious error.
Alma

1830: ... the Son of the only begotten of the Father ... 
Now: ... the only begotten of the Father ... 5:48
1830: cherubims (as in the King James Version) 
Now: cherubim 12:21 (Cheribims is the incorrect plural of cherub.)

On page 546 of the first edition of the Book of Mormon we read as follows:

"... for this cause did king Benjamin keep them ... "

In the 1964 edition, Ether 4:1, we read:

"... for this cause did king Mosiah keep them ... "

A change has been made in the First Book of Nephi, evidently in an attempt to strengthen the Mormon claim that baptism was practiced by the people in the Old Testament. This verse is taken from Isaiah 48, and appears as follows in the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon:

"Hearken and hear this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the Lord ... " (Book of Mormon, 1830 edition, page 52)

In modern editions it reads as follows:

"Hearken and hear this, O house of Jacob, who are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, or out of the waters of baptism, who swear by the name of the Lord ... " (Book of Mormon, 1964 edition, 1 Nephi 20:1)

It is interesting to note that even the signed statement by the eight witnesses to the Book of Mormon has been altered. In the 1830 edition (last page) it read:

"... that Joseph Smith, Jr. the Author and Proprietor of this work, has shewn unto us the plates ... "

In the 1964 edition it reads:

"... That Joseph Smith, Jun., the Translator of this work, has shown unto us the plates ... "

In the first edition, page 87, this statement appears:

"... the mean man boweth down ..."

In the 1964 edition (2 Nephi 12:9) this has been changed to read:

"... the mean man boweth not down ... "

In the first edition, page 303, this statement is made concerning God:

"... yea, I know that he allotteth unto men, yea, decreeth unto them decrees which are unalterable, according to their wills ... "

In the 1964 reprint (Alma 29:4) eight words have been deleted:

"... yea, I know that he allotteth unto men according to their wills ..."

In 1981 this was changed back to the original wording.

In the first edition, page 328, the following appears:

"... yea, and that ye preserve these directors ... And now my son, these directors were prepared, that the word of God might be fulfilled ..."

This has been changed to read as follows in the 1964 edition (Alma 37:21, 24):

"yea, and that ye preserve these interpreters… And now my son, these interpreters were prepared that the word of God might be fulfilled… "

n the first edition of the Book of Mormon, page 31, the following appears:

"…neither will the Lord God suffer that the Gentiles shall forever remain in that state of awful woundedness…"

In the 1964 edition (1 Nephi 13:32) this has been changed to read:

"Neither will the Lord God suffer that the Gentiles shall forever remain in that awful state of blindness…"

On page 214 of the first edition this statement appears:

"My soul was wrecked with eternal torment ..."

In the 1964 edition (Mosiah 27:29) this has been changed to read:

"My soul was racked with eternal torment ..."

On page 379 of the first edition this statement appears:

"Now the Nephites were guarded in the city of Gid; therefore Moroni caused that Laman and a small number of men which was appointed to go with him."

This sentence is incomplete in the first edition; however, in the 1964 edition (Alma 55:7) it was changed to read as follows:

"Now the Nephites were guarded in the city of Gid; therefore Moroni appointed Laman and caused that a small number of men should go with him."

On page 351 of the first edition we read:

"And when Moroni had said these words, he went forth among the people, waving the rent of his garment in the air, that all might see the writing which he had wrote upon the rent, and crying with a loud voice ..."

In the 1964 edition (Alma 46:19) this has been changed to read as follows:

"And when Moroni had said these words, he went forth among the people, waving the rent part of his garment in the air, that all might see the writing which he had written upon the rent part, crying with a loud voice ..."

On page 353 of the first edition this statement appeared:

"... the cause of diseases which was subsequent to man, by the nature of the climate."

In the 1964 reprint (Alma 46:40) this has been changed to read:

"... the cause of diseases, to which men were subject, by the nature of the climate—"

On page 382 of the first edition this statement appears:

"... for behold, his army had been reduced by the Lamanites because of the numerority of their forces having slain a vast number of our men ..."

In the 1964 reprint (Alma 56:10) this was changed to read:

"... for behold, his army had been reduced by the Lamanites because their forces had slain a vast number of our men ...."

On page 342 of the first edition we find the following:

"... took the remainder part of his army and marched ..."

In the 1964 reprint (Alma 43:25) this has been changed to read:

"... took the remaining part of his army and marched ..."

On page 501 of the first edition this statement appears:

"... for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more."

In the 1964 reprint (3 Nephi 22:4) nine words have been added:

"... for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more."

On page 305 of the first edition we find the following:

"But behold, it is the effects of a phrensied mind ... "

In the 1964 reprint (Alma 30:16) this has been changed to read:

"But behold, it is the effect of a frenzied mind ... "

On page 236 of the first edition the following statement appeared:

"... I know that Jesus Christ shall come; yea the Son of the only begotten of the Father ..."

In the 1964 reprint (Alma 5:48) the word of has been deleted:

"... I know that Jesus Christ shall come, yea, the Son, the Only begotten of the Father ... "

On page 555 of the first edition this statement appears:

"... his sons and to his daughters, which were not, or which did not seek his destruction."

In the 1964 edition (Ether 9:2) this has been changed to read:

"... his sons and to his daughters who did not seek his destruction."

On page 538 of the first edition this statement appeared:

"... and also that none other people knoweth our language; and because that none other people knoweth our language, therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof."

In the 1964 reprint (Mormon 9:34) nine words have been deleted:

"... and also that none other people knoweth our language; therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof."

On page 203 of the first edition we find the following:

"... none were consecrated except it were just men."

In the 1964 reprint (Mosiah 23:17) this has been changed to read:

"... none were consecrated except they were just men."

On page 475 of the first edition the following appears:

"... because they testified particular concerning us, which is the remnant of their seed... . And those things which testifies of us, are they not written ..."

In the 1964 reprint (3 Nephi 11:16, 17) this has been changed to read:

"... because they testified particularly concerning us, who are the remnant of their seed.... And these things which testify of us, are they not written..."

On page 541 of the first edition we find the following:

"... and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness be come ..."

In the 1964 reprint (Ether 2:11) this has been changed to read:

"... and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come ..."

On page 233 of the first edition we find this statement:

"... he awaked them out of a deep sleep ..."

In the 1964 edition (Alma 5:7) this has been changed to read:

"... he awakened them out of a deep sleep ..."

On page 272 of the first edition we find the following:

"... and thus we will reserve the flocks unto the king ..."

In the 1964 edition (Alma 17:31) this has been changed to read:

"... and thus we will preserve the flocks unto the king ..."

On page 272 of the first edition this statement appears:

"... and they were not in number a very few ..."

In the 1964 edition (Alma 17:34) this has been changed to read:

"... and they were in number not a few."

On page 277 of the first edition we find the following:

"... and the light of everlasting light was lit up in his soul ..."

In the 1964 reprint (Alma 19:6) this has been changed to read:

"... and that the light of everlasting life was lit up in his soul ..."

On page 406 of the first edition this statement appears:

"... they were drowned up in the depths of the sea."

In the 1964 edition (Alma 63:8) this has been changed to read:

"... they were drowned in the depths of the sea."

On page 382 of the first edition we read as follows:

"... therefore it supposeth me that I tell you ..."

In the 1964 edition (Alma 56:5) this has been changed to read:

"Therefore it sufficeth me that I tell you ..."

In 2001, while he was a cardinal, the pope issued a secret Vatican edict to Catholic bishops all over the world, instructing them to put the Church's interests ahead of child safety.   The document recommended that rather than reporting sexual abuse to the relevant legal authorities, bishops should encourage the victim, witnesses and perpetrator not to talk about it. And, to keep victims quiet, it threatened that if they repeat the allegations they would be excommunicated.

The main problem here is that the roman catholic "church" is one of the only organizations that has offered peverts of every stripe and pedophiles in particular a career, protection and access to children. Over time this has led to more and more perverts being attracted to the Church.

"The real problem the Catholic Church faces," explains Father Donald B. Cozzens, author of "The Changing Face of the Priesthood," is the "disproportionate number of gay men that populate our seminaries." "I think we have to ask the question: Why are 90 to 95 – and some estimates say as high as 98 – percent of the victims of clergy acting out against teen-agers, boys? Why isn't there ... a higher percentage of teen-age girls?" Cozzens declared on NBC's Meet the Press recently.

January 31, 2000 | CNN KANSAS CITY, Missouri (AP) -- Roman Catholic priests in the United States are dying from AIDS-related illnesses at a rate four times higher than the general population and the cause is often concealed on their death certificates, The Kansas City Star reported in a series of stories that started Sunday.

WE ARE NOT TALKING NUMBERS, BUT ORDERS FROM THE CATHOLIC ORGANISATION TO COVER UP AND HIDE THEM!
 

On 4/24/2016 at 9:00 AM, Shiwiii said:

My question comes from John 1:1. If Jesus is "a god", then He is another god. Thus creating two gods. Is Jesus a legitimate god or is He a false god?  The common answer is that satan is a God of this world, ok fine. Does that make satan a legitimate god? Isaiah 43:10 says that there is no God other than He.none formed before or after.  So is Jesus a legitimate god or not? If so, then explain why you believe this.

Yes, you got it.

The watchtowers "translation" of John 1:1 clearly makes them polytheists.

They didnt translate anything, though. 

The used known ( to the watchtower ) SPIRITIST johannes greber's papers for this passage.

CHRIST’S BODILY RESURRECTION ‘I have power to take it again’Jn 10:18

Watchtower Teaching: ‘Jesus was raised to life as an invisible spirit. He did not take up again that body in which he had been killed . . .’ ‘Let your Name be sanctified.’ (p.266).

The Watchtower teaches that Jesus’ body was disposed of by God.
The NWT mistranslates I Peter 3:18 as ‘being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit’ to teach merely a spiritual resurrection of Christ.

Bible Teaching: I Peter 3:18 refers to when Christ died. His Spirit went and preached to spirits in prison (v. 19,20). After three days, Christ’s physical body was raised.

I Peter 3:18 (KJV) correctly reads: ‘being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.’

Which Scriptures best teach Christ’s bodily resurrection?

1. ‘They were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.’ (v.37) He said unto them, ‘Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.’ (Luke 24:37, 39)

Notice that the resurrected Christ says here that:

(1) He is not a spirit;
(2) His resurrection body has flesh and bones;
(3) His physical hands and feet are proof of His physical resurrection;
Jesus is trying to convince them that He, ‘I myself’ has a permanent physical body which still had the nail scars in His hands and feet. This is opposite to the WT teaching that Christ’s body was disposed of and that He became only a spirit. If the WT claim was correct, then
Jesus would be deceiving the disciples here in showing them His body.

2. ‘Then saith he to Thomas, . . . reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.’ (John 20:27)
Here Jesus says that He has a physical side that He challenges Thomas to touch.

3. ‘Neither did his flesh see corruption.’ - Acts 2:30,31
Notice the following:
a) God promised David that ‘according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ’ to sit on his throne.’ (v.30). This is a bodily resurrection of Christ, not spiritual. The NWT omits this because of its corrupt Westcott-Hort Greek text. Well over 38 manuscripts have it.
b) ‘neither did his flesh see corruption’ (v.31) means that Christ’s body did not decay.

Why? Because Jesus was raised from the dead in a material, fleshly body.

4. ‘I will raise it up . . . he spake of the temple of his body.’ - John 2:19-21
‘Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up (v.19). But he spake of the temple of his body.’ (v.21)

Jesus here promised that He Himself would raise up His own body after three days.

Notice how Jesus uses the word ‘body’ meaning a bodily resurrection, not a spiritual resurrection.

5. Christ promises to eat of the fruit of the vine in the Kingdom. Only a body can eat.

‘I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the Kingdom of God shall come.’(Luke 22:18)

Jesus here showed that his resurrected body would be able to eat and drink even in the Kingdom of God. Notice that a non-material spirit cannot eat and drink. Jesus promised the disciples in Luke 22:30 ‘that ye may eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom.’

Question: If Jesus expected to become an immaterial spirit, why would He promise the disciples that they would eat and drink with Christ at His table in His Kingdom?

6. Christ ate a broiled fish and a honeycomb in front of them. Luke 24:41,42.

7. ‘he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies’. Rom. 8:11
As Christ’s body was raised physically from the dead, so shall our mortal bodies be raised.

8. His resurrection body could ‘breathe on them’(John 20:22). A spirit cannot breathe, can it?

9. ‘His feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives...’ Zechariah 14:4

A spirit does not have feet. Only a physical body has feet as Jesus has at His second coming.

10. ‘One shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands?’ Zechariah 13:6

Question: How can a non-material spirit have wounds in his hands which can be observed?

11. The resurrected, glorified Christ touched John, laying his right hand on him. Rev. 1:17

Watchtower Objection: JWs quote I Corinthians 15:44,50 to support their claim that Jesus was raised from the dead as a spirit creature:
a) ‘It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.’ (v.44)
b) ‘flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.’ (v.50). JWs claim that Jesus must have had a spiritual resurrection, because flesh-and-blood bodies cannot exist in heaven.

They claim that mortality and corruption belong to the fleshly body.

Bible Teaching:

a) The Greek word for body, ‘soma’ (4983), always means a material body, an organised whole made up of parts, when used of a person (Zodhiates, NT Word Study,p.1358). The spiritual
body in I Cor.15:44 is not an immaterial body, but a supernatural, spirit-dominated body.

It is a body directed by the spirit, as opposed to a body under the dominion of the flesh.

There are no exceptions to Paul using ‘soma’ for a material body.
Paul even refers to a believer as a ‘spiritual’ man who judges all things (I Cor. 2:15), yet Paul did not mean an immaterial invisible man with no physical body.

He meant a spirit-controlled man with a flesh and blood body.

QUESTION: In I Corinthians 2:15 (‘He that is spiritual judgeth all things’), is Paul discussing an invisible spirit creature or a material, flesh-and-blood human? Can you see that being ‘spiritual’ does not demand a non-material body? The same is true in I Corinthians 15:44.
b) Key: In v.50 ‘flesh and blood’ is an idiom meaning that mortal, perishable, earth-bound
humans, as we are now, cannot have a place in God’s glorious, heavenly Kingdom.
c) ‘this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.’v.53
Nothing is taken away from us (materialness). Instead immortality is ‘put on’ or added to us.
Question: Don’t the words ‘put on’ mean adding something to humanity (that is immortality),
not taking away something from humanity (our material body)?

Conclusion: Since Christ’s resurrected body could eat, drink, breathe (John 20:22), show His hands and feet with scars (Luke 24:40), be touched, and have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39), it is certain that this body was a material body. This is especially true since Jesus corrected the disciples’ misconception that they had seen a spirit (Luke 24:37).

For the JWs to say that a body is not a body, is their last resort of redefining common words.
 

HOLY SPIRIT: Is He a PERSON or an ACTIVE FORCE? II Cor. 3:17

Watchtower Teaching: The WT claims that the HS is neither a person nor God, but an impersonal ‘active force’ to achieve God’s will, like electricity or radio waves.

Bible Teaching: The Holy Spirit is fully God and has personality as He can be blasphemed.

The Holy Spirit has the three attributes of personality, those being: mind, emotions and will.

An ‘active force’ does not have personal attributes. The WT’s claim of the Holy Spirit being an active force is disproven if the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit has mind,emotions & will.

1. The Holy Spirit has a mind.

(1) ‘He that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit’. (Romans 8:27). The word ‘mind’ means ‘way of thinking’, something which is only true of a person.

(2) ‘The things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.’ (I Corinthians 2:11).

QUESTION: How can the Holy Spirit know the things of God if the Spirit does not have a mind? A force does not know things. To know requires a mind.

(3) The Spirit searcheth all things’ (I Corinthians 2:10). The Greek word for ‘search’ means to thoroughly investigate a matter, something only a mind can do.

2) The Holy Spirit has emotions

(4) The Holy Spirit loves: ‘I beseech you..through the love of the Spirit’.(Rom 15:30 NWT).

(5) ‘Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God’. (Ephesians 4:30) The Holy Spirit is grieved (made sad) when believers sin. Grief is an emotion that one feels. A force can’t be grieved.

3) The Holy Spirit has a will. He performs personal acts.

(6) The Holy Spirit distributes spiritual gifts ‘to every man severally as he will.’(I Cor.12:11) The phrase ‘he wills’ in Greek means ‘a decision of the will after previous deliberation’. The Holy Spirit chooses which gifts each believer receives. A force has no such will,
nor ability to make decisions.

(7) The Holy Spirit commands: ‘The Spirit bade me go with them’ (Acts 11:12)

(8) The Holy Spirit forbids:‘forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia’.Acts 16:6

(9) The Holy Spirit speaks: ‘The Spirit said to Philip, Go near.’ (Acts 8:29)

‘The Holy Ghost said, separate me Barnabus and Saul’. (Acts 13:2)

‘The Spirit speaketh expressly’. (I Timothy 4:1).

QUESTION: How do you explain the WT view of the Holy Spirit being an impersonal force, with the Bible’s teaching that the Holy Spirit has a mind that can know, emotions that can feel love and grief, and a will to make decisions?

(10) The Holy Spirit testifies: ‘He shall testify of me’. (John 15:26).
The same Greek word for testify (or bear witness) used here, is also used of:

a) The disciples testifying about Christ in John 15:27.
b) John the Baptist bearing witness to the truth in John 5:33.
c) God the Father bore witness to Cornelius’ (and Gentiles’) conversion by giving them the Holy Spirit. (Acts 15:8)

Just as the disciples, John and God the Father (who are all persons) testified or bore witness, so the Holy Spirit bears witness about Christ. A force cannot bear witness, only a person can. (The Holy Spirit bears witness in heaven and on earth - I John 5:7,8)

(11) The Holy Spirit intercedes or prays for believers.‘The Spirit itself makes intercession for us with groanings’. (Romans 8:26). 

Just as Jesus Christ (a person) intercedes for believers (Romans 8:34; Hebrews 7:25), so the Holy Spirit (as a person) intercedes
(same Greek word) for believers. A force cannot pray for another; only a person can pray.

(12) The Holy Spirit teaches believers. (‘he shall teach you all things’. John 14:26)

(13) The Holy Spirit hears. ‘Whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak.’ (John 16:13)

(14) The Holy Spirit shows us things. ‘he....shall show it unto you’. (John 16:15)

(15) The Holy Spirit restrains sin. ‘My Spirit shall not always strive with man’(Genesis 6:3)

(16) The Holy Spirit can be blasphemed.‘he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost’.Mk3:29

People cannot be blasphemed. We can only be slandered. Only God can be blasphemed.

By Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit being blasphemed means we’ve proved the Trinity.

(a) God the Father can be blasphemed. (Revelation 13:6; 16:9)
(b) God the Son can be blasphemed. (Luke 22:65)
‘And many other things blasphemously they spake against him’.
(c) God the Holy Spirit can be blasphemed. (Matthew 12:31)
‘Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven unto men.’

(17) The Holy Spirit can be lied to (Acts 5:3). Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit.
QUESTION: Have you ever lied to electricity and asked electricity to forgive you?

(18) The Holy Spirit cries in our hearts, Abba, Father. (Galatians 4:6)

(19) The Holy Spirit approves some decisions:
‘It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us’. (Acts 15:28)

(20) The Holy Spirit invites people to be saved:‘The Spirit & the bride say Come’Rev 22:17

(21) The Holy Spirit fills us (Ephesians 5:18) just as God may fill us (Ephesians 3:19).

(22) The Holy Spirit uses personal pronouns to describe Himself: John 15:26; 16:13;(he):

‘The Holy Spirit said, Separate me Barnabus. . .’ (Acts 13:2).

The Holy Spirit considers Himself a person, not a personification.

Watchtower Objection:
The main reason the JWs say that the Holy Spirit is an ‘active force’ is because the Greek word for ‘spirit’ (pneuma) is neuter.

Answer: This is faulty reasoning, because 1)the gender of a word relates to the grammatical form of the word, not to its sex or physical gender. Because a word is grammatically neuter does not mean that the object is an ‘it’ or of neuter sex.
(Source: Elements of NT Greek, J W Wenham, 1979, p.8).

For example, in Greek, ‘children’ is a neuter word, ‘desert’ is a feminine word, etc.and

2) In John 15:26 and 16:13, the neuter noun ‘pneuma’ is referred to by the masculine pronoun ‘ekeinos’ (1565=that one, masculine) recognising the Holy Spirit’s masculine personality. ‘He (ekeinos) shall testify of me’ (15:26); ‘when he (ekeinos), the Spirit of
truth shall come’ (16:13). Note: ‘ekeine’ is feminine ‘that one’, and ‘ekeino’ is neuter).

(23) The Holy Spirit comforts (Gk: parakletos) believers. John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7. This same Greek word ‘parakletos’ (3875) is used of Christ who has personality in John 14:16 and I John 2:1. ‘Another Comforter’ (Gk: allos parakletos, John 14:16) means
‘another of the same kind’ as Christ, in contrast to ‘heteros’ (2087) meaning ‘another of a different kind’. As Christ has Deity and Personality, so does the Holy Spirit. To comfort requires empathy, understanding, love, compassion and concern for another’s
well-being, all being attributes of personality.

Conclusion: Hence,the Holy Spirit is a person because 1) He has mind, emotions,& will. 2) Personal pronouns are used of Him. 3) He performs personal acts.4) He associates with the Father and Son in the Baptism formula, Apostolic benediction and as Church
Administrator (I Cor. 12:4-6). 5) He can be personally mistreated (tempted, lied to, grieved, resisted, insulted and blasphemed). The New Testament clearly shows the Holy Spirit to have a personality and to be God. (‘Jehovah is the Spirit’ II Cor. 3:17 NWT).
 

HOLY SPIRIT: Is He a PERSON or an ACTIVE FORCE? II Cor3:17

Watchtower Teaching: The WT claims that the HS is neither a person nor God, but an impersonal ‘active force’ to achieve God’s will, like electricity or radio waves.

Bible Teaching: The Holy Spirit is fully God and has personality as He can be blasphemed.

The Holy Spirit has the three attributes of personality, those being: mind, emotions and will.

An ‘active force’ does not have personal attributes. The WT’s claim of the Holy Spirit being an active force is disproven if the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit has mind,emotions & will.

1. The Holy Spirit has a mind.

(1) ‘He that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit’. (Romans 8:27). The word ‘mind’ means ‘way of thinking’, something which is only true of a person.

(2) ‘The things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.’ (I Corinthians 2:11).

QUESTION: How can the Holy Spirit know the things of God if the Spirit does not have a mind? A force does not know things. To know requires a mind.

(3) The Spirit searcheth all things’ (I Corinthians 2:10). The Greek word for ‘search’ means to thoroughly investigate a matter, something only a mind can do.

2) The Holy Spirit has emotions

(4) The Holy Spirit loves: ‘I beseech you..through the love of the Spirit’.(Rom 15:30 NWT).

(5) ‘Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God’. (Ephesians 4:30) The Holy Spirit is grieved (made sad) when believers sin. Grief is an emotion that one feels. A force can’t be grieved.

3) The Holy Spirit has a will. He performs personal acts.

(6) The Holy Spirit distributes spiritual gifts ‘to every man severally as he will.’(I Cor.12:11) The phrase ‘he wills’ in Greek means ‘a decision of the will after previous deliberation’. The Holy Spirit chooses which gifts each believer receives. A force has no such will,
nor ability to make decisions.

(7) The Holy Spirit commands: ‘The Spirit bade me go with them’ (Acts 11:12)

(8) The Holy Spirit forbids:‘forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia’.Acts 16:6

(9) The Holy Spirit speaks: ‘The Spirit said to Philip, Go near.’ (Acts 8:29)

‘The Holy Ghost said, separate me Barnabus and Saul’. (Acts 13:2)

‘The Spirit speaketh expressly’. (I Timothy 4:1).

QUESTION: How do you explain the WT view of the Holy Spirit being an impersonal force, with the Bible’s teaching that the Holy Spirit has a mind that can know, emotions that can feel love and grief, and a will to make decisions?

(10) The Holy Spirit testifies: ‘He shall testify of me’. (John 15:26).
The same Greek word for testify (or bear witness) used here, is also used of:

a) The disciples testifying about Christ in John 15:27.
b) John the Baptist bearing witness to the truth in John 5:33.
c) God the Father bore witness to Cornelius’ (and Gentiles’) conversion by giving them the Holy Spirit. (Acts 15:8)

Just as the disciples, John and God the Father (who are all persons) testified or bore witness, so the Holy Spirit bears witness about Christ. A force cannot bear witness, only a person can. (The Holy Spirit bears witness in heaven and on earth - I John 5:7,8)

(11) The Holy Spirit intercedes or prays for believers.‘The Spirit itself makes intercession for us with groanings’. (Romans 8:26). 

Just as Jesus Christ (a person) intercedes for believers (Romans 8:34; Hebrews 7:25), so the Holy Spirit (as a person) intercedes
(same Greek word) for believers. A force cannot pray for another; only a person can pray.

(12) The Holy Spirit teaches believers. (‘he shall teach you all things’. John 14:26)

(13) The Holy Spirit hears. ‘Whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak.’ (John 16:13)

(14) The Holy Spirit shows us things. ‘he....shall show it unto you’. (John 16:15)

(15) The Holy Spirit restrains sin. ‘My Spirit shall not always strive with man’(Genesis 6:3)

(16) The Holy Spirit can be blasphemed.‘he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost’.Mk3:29

People cannot be blasphemed. We can only be slandered. Only God can be blasphemed.

By Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit being blasphemed means we’ve proved the Trinity.

(a) God the Father can be blasphemed. (Revelation 13:6; 16:9)
(b) God the Son can be blasphemed. (Luke 22:65)
‘And many other things blasphemously they spake against him’.
(c) God the Holy Spirit can be blasphemed. (Matthew 12:31)
‘Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven unto men.’

(17) The Holy Spirit can be lied to (Acts 5:3). Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit.
QUESTION: Have you ever lied to electricity and asked electricity to forgive you?

(18) The Holy Spirit cries in our hearts, Abba, Father. (Galatians 4:6)

(19) The Holy Spirit approves some decisions:
‘It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us’. (Acts 15:28)

(20) The Holy Spirit invites people to be saved:‘The Spirit & the bride say Come’Rev 22:17

(21) The Holy Spirit fills us (Ephesians 5:18) just as God may fill us (Ephesians 3:19).

(22) The Holy Spirit uses personal pronouns to describe Himself: John 15:26; 16:13;(he):

‘The Holy Spirit said, Separate me Barnabus. . .’ (Acts 13:2).

The Holy Spirit considers Himself a person, not a personification.

Watchtower Objection:
The main reason the JWs say that the Holy Spirit is an ‘active force’ is because the Greek word for ‘spirit’ (pneuma) is neuter.

Answer: This is faulty reasoning, because 1)the gender of a word relates to the grammatical form of the word, not to its sex or physical gender. Because a word is grammatically neuter does not mean that the object is an ‘it’ or of neuter sex.
(Source: Elements of NT Greek, J W Wenham, 1979, p.8).

For example, in Greek, ‘children’ is a neuter word, ‘desert’ is a feminine word, etc.and

2) In John 15:26 and 16:13, the neuter noun ‘pneuma’ is referred to by the masculine pronoun ‘ekeinos’ (1565=that one, masculine) recognising the Holy Spirit’s masculine personality. ‘He (ekeinos) shall testify of me’ (15:26); ‘when he (ekeinos), the Spirit of
truth shall come’ (16:13). Note: ‘ekeine’ is feminine ‘that one’, and ‘ekeino’ is neuter).

(23) The Holy Spirit comforts (Gk: parakletos) believers. John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7. This same Greek word ‘parakletos’ (3875) is used of Christ who has personality in John 14:16 and I John 2:1. ‘Another Comforter’ (Gk: allos parakletos, John 14:16) means
‘another of the same kind’ as Christ, in contrast to ‘heteros’ (2087) meaning ‘another of a different kind’. As Christ has Deity and Personality, so does the Holy Spirit. To comfort requires empathy, understanding, love, compassion and concern for another’s
well-being, all being attributes of personality.

Conclusion: Hence,the Holy Spirit is a person because 1) He has mind, emotions,& will. 2) Personal pronouns are used of Him. 3) He performs personal acts.4) He associates with the Father and Son in the Baptism formula, Apostolic benediction and as Church
Administrator (I Cor. 12:4-6). 5) He can be personally mistreated (tempted, lied to, grieved, resisted, insulted and blasphemed). The New Testament clearly shows the Holy Spirit to have a personality and to be God. (‘Jehovah is the Spirit’ II Cor. 3:17 NWT).
 

22 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Right away Sir!

 

Matt 28:18 (Jesus)	Job 34:13 (Jehovah)
New International Version
Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.	Who appointed him over the earth? Who put him in charge of the whole world?
New Living Translation
Jesus came and told his disciples, "I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth.	Who put him in charge of the earth? Who appointed him to be over the whole world?
English Standard Version
And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.	Who gave him charge over the earth, and who laid on him the whole world?
New American Standard Bible
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.	"Who gave Him authority over the earth? And who has laid on Him the whole world?
King James Bible
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.	Who hath given him a charge over the earth? or who hath disposed the whole world?
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Then Jesus came near and said to them, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.	Who gave Him authority over the earth? Who put Him in charge of the entire world?
International Standard Version
Then Jesus approached them and told them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.	Who entrusted the earth to him? Who made him responsible for the entire inhabited world?
NET Bible
Then Jesus came up and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.	Who entrusted to him the earth? And who put him over the whole world?
New American Standard 1977
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.	“Who gave Him authority over the earth?               And who has laid on Him the whole world?
King James 2000 Bible
And Jesus came and spoke unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.	Who has given him charge over the earth? or who has laid on him the whole world?
American King James Version
And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.	Who has given him a charge over the earth? or who has disposed the whole world?
American Standard Version
And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth.	Who gave him a charge over the earth? Or who hath disposed the whole world?
Douay-Rheims Bible
And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.	What other hath he appointed over the earth? or whom hath he set over the world which he made?
Darby Bible Translation
And Jesus coming up spoke to them, saying, All power has been given me in heaven and upon earth.	Who hath entrusted to him the earth? and who hath disposed the whole world?
English Revised Version
And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth.	Who gave him a charge over the earth? or who hath disposed the whole world?
Webster's Bible Translation
And Jesus came, and spoke to them, saying, All power is given to me in heaven and upon earth.	Who hath given him a charge over the earth? or who hath disposed the whole world?
World English Bible
Jesus came to them and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.	Who put him in charge of the earth? or who has appointed him over the whole world?
Young's Literal Translation
And having come near, Jesus spake to them, saying, 'Given to me was all authority in heaven and on earth;	Who hath inspected for Himself the earth? And who hath placed all the habitable world?

 

What does your chart show or what are you trying to prove, my friend?

22 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

 

I like Jonah too.

Jonah 3:4.

"Then Jonah entered the city, and walking a day's journey, he was proclaiming, "In just 40 days more , Nineveh will be overthrown."

Sorry about "the satanic NWT", but I think the others say similar.

Funny how you ignore the examples of false prophecies from the watchtower. Once you address those, i am more than happy to address Jonah.

Here are some of them again:

1889- In subsequent chapters we present proofs that the setting up of the Kingdom of God has already begun...And that the "battle of the great day of God almighty [revelation 16:14], which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of the earth's present rulership, is already commenced. [The 1915 edition of this book changed "A.D. 1914" to "A.D. 1915."] *from the book "The Time is at Hand; 1889
1897 "Our Lord, the appointed King, is now present, since October 1874," (Studies in the Scriptures, vol. 4, p. 621).
1899 "...the 'battle of the great day of God Almighty' (Revelation 16:14), which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth's present rulership, is already commenced," (The Time Is at Hand, 1908 edition, p. 101).
1916 "The Bible chronology herein presented shows that the six great 1000 year days beginning with Adam are ended, and that the great 7th Day, the 1000 years of Christ's Reign, began in 1873," (The Time Is at Hand, forward, p. ii).
1918 "Therefore we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old, particularly those named by the Apostle in Hebrews 11, to the condition of human perfection," (Millions Now Living Will Never Die, p. 89).
1922 "The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914," (Watchtower, Sept. 1, 1922, p. 262).
1923 "Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith than Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge," (Watchtower, Apr. 1, 1923, p. 106).
1925 "The year 1925 is here. With great expectation Christians have looked forward to this year. Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people. Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year," (Watchtower, Jan. 1, 1925, p. 3).
1925 "It is to be expected that Satan will try to inject into the minds of the consecrated, the thought that 1925 should see an end to the work," (Watchtower, Sept., 1925, p. 262).
1926 "Some anticipated that the work would end in 1925, but the Lord did not state so. The difficulty was that the friends inflated their imaginations beyond reason; and that when their imaginations burst asunder, they were inclined to throw away everything," (Watchtower, p. 232).
1931 "There was a measure of disappointment on the part of Jehovah's faithful ones on earth concerning the years 1917, 1918, and 1925, which disappointment lasted for a time...and they also learned to quit fixing dates," (Vindication, p. 338).
1941 "Receiving the gift, the marching children clasped it to them, not a toy or plaything for idle pleasure, but the Lord's provided instrument for most effective work in the remaining months before Armageddon," (Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1941, p. 288).
 

If the name Jehovah is so important, then why is it never used in the entire Greek New Testament? If men edited out the name of God, "YHWH" when they copied the New Testament, as only the Watchtower organization claims, then how can we have any confidence in any of the New Testament? Should we discard the New Testament or the Watchtower organization as unreliable?
 

44 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

You do realize that Moses wrote Genesis, not Abraham, right? This was done under God's inspiration right? 

 

There are multiple writers that were involved with Genesis

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Jehovah and Jesus just are not the same. Compare Job 34:12-13 and Matt. 28:18.

They ARE the same as i have pointed out to you.

You need to get rid of your satanic NWT

Because their own rendering of John 1:1 makes Jesus _A_ God, hence they believe in two Gods.

On 4/7/2016 at 0:44 AM, Eoin Joyce said:

We will know it when it comes.

 

Thank you! We are a pretty amazing bunch I must agree!

Yes, amazing how you can put total commitment into an organisation that has proven itself to be so wrong.

1983 "Avoid independent thinking...questioning the counsel that is provided by God's visible organization." (Watchtower, Jan. 15, 1983 pg. 22)

1983 "Fight against independent thinking." (Watchtower, Jan. 15, 1983 pg. 27 )