Jump to content
The World News Media

Demonism and the Watchtower


Alessandro Corona
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Member
11 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

I would add that probably you know really how insignificant this reference is in support of your claim of:

There is as much credibilty and relevance in this claim as there would be in suggesting  that Luke the Gospel writer relied on an occult source for the words recorded at, for example, Luke 4:9-11. I can't be bothered to cite other examples in Scripture as the claim is so preposterous.

Gone Fishing,

 

Why do you think that this is “insignificant” in the context of the thread?

 

Is it true? Yes!

 

Luke 4 records Jesus’ interaction with the Devil, but nowhere in that discourse does Luke “support” the actions or speech of the Devil. So it is preposterous for you to say that that is similar!

 

Does the Watchtower agree with the occultist teachings? Yes.

 

Why does 1 Tim. 4:1 speak out against demon inspired teaching if it’s insignificant? Because this is what is to happen and is happening!

 

Why play down the fact that the Watchtower is in accord with demonic teachings?

 

The Watchtower's occult links are true. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 6.2k
  • Replies 190
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In order NOT to be labeled a liar and a slanderer, Alessandro Corona ... and justifiably so ... you are going to have to PROVE EVERY ASPECT of those statements you just made.  YOU PERSONALLY ... not just waving your hand at a PDF file link. I assume you did not just pull them out of your imagination. Please supply enough detailed overview and references that your seemingly OUTRAGEOUS claims may be INDEPENDENTLY checked by the average, reasonable person. If you do not ... and

Every once in awhile ... even a blind pig finds an acorn.

I know that the counsel about not exposing dirty laundry is sincere, and for this I thank you. As far as I can tell, such counsel should not apply to this particular situation. Obviously, then, we see our duty in this regard quite differently, and so, in the spirit of 1 Peter 3:15,  I feel I should explain.  The dirty laundry is already hung up for everyone to see. This is the Internet. Anyone can simply Google the information claimed in the original post of this topic, and they will discov

Posted Images

  • Member
4 minutes ago, Cos said:

Why do you think that this is “insignificant” in the context of the thread?

insignificant

ɪnsɪɡˈnɪfɪk(ə)nt/

adjective

1. too small or unimportant to be worth consideration.

"the sum required was insignificant compared with military spending"

synonyms:unimportant, of minor importance, of no importance, of little importance, of little import, trivial, trifling, footling, negligible, inconsequential, of little consequence, of no consequence, of no account, of no moment, inconsiderable, not worth mentioning, not worth speaking of, nugatory, meagre, paltry, scanty, petty, insubstantial, unsubstantial, flimsy, frivolous, pointless, worthless, irrelevant, immaterial, peripheral, extraneous, non-essential; 

2. meaningless.

"insignificant yet enchanting phrases"

The point of reference has no relevance to the assertions made.

8 minutes ago, Cos said:

nowhere in that discourse does Luke “support” the actions or speech of the Devil.

By the same token, nowhere does the WT "support" the actions or speech of the Devil. To claim otherwise is "preposterous".

In fact, Jesus faced similar stupid assertions from religionists in his day:

(Matthew 12:24)

"the Pharisees said: “This fellow does not expel the demons except by means of Be·elʹze·bub, the ruler of the demons.”

and dealt with them graciously:

(Matthew 12:25-28) 

"Knowing their thoughts, he said to them: “Every kingdom divided against itself comes to ruin, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand.  In the same way, if Satan expels Satan, he has become divided against himself; how, then, will his kingdom stand?  Moreover, if I expel the demons by means of Be·elʹze·bub, by whom do your sons expel them? This is why they will be your judges.  But if it is by means of God’s spirit that I expel the demons, the Kingdom of God has really overtaken you."
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
22 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

insignificant

ɪnsɪɡˈnɪfɪk(ə)nt/

adjective

1. too small or unimportant to be worth consideration.

"the sum required was insignificant compared with military spending"

synonyms:unimportant, of minor importance, of no importance, of little importance, of little import, trivial, trifling, footling, negligible, inconsequential, of little consequence, of no consequence, of no account, of no moment, inconsiderable, not worth mentioning, not worth speaking of, nugatory, meagre, paltry, scanty, petty, insubstantial, unsubstantial, flimsy, frivolous, pointless, worthless, irrelevant, immaterial, peripheral, extraneous, non-essential; 

2. meaningless.

"insignificant yet enchanting phrases"

The point of reference has no relevance to the assertions made.

By the same token, nowhere does the WT "support" the actions or speech of the Devil. To claim otherwise is "preposterous".

In fact, Jesus faced similar stupid assertions from religionists in his day:

(Matthew 12:24)

"the Pharisees said: “This fellow does not expel the demons except by means of Be·elʹze·bub, the ruler of the demons.”

and dealt with them graciously:

(Matthew 12:25-28) 

"Knowing their thoughts, he said to them: “Every kingdom divided against itself comes to ruin, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand.  In the same way, if Satan expels Satan, he has become divided against himself; how, then, will his kingdom stand?  Moreover, if I expel the demons by means of Be·elʹze·bub, by whom do your sons expel them? This is why they will be your judges.  But if it is by means of God’s spirit that I expel the demons, the Kingdom of God has really overtaken you."
 

Gone fishing,

 

The Watchtower DO support the utterance of demons, they acknowledge this by citing for support of their own teaching, an occultist!

 

Gone Fishing, I thought you were a bit more astute, but it seems not, the Jews FALSELY accused Jesus of being in league with the Devil, how is that the same as the Watchtower agreeing with demon inspired teachings?

 

Answer this simple question; did the Watchtower use the renderings of Johannes Greber’s NT to support their own renderings of NT passages? Yes or no?

 

The Bible firmly condemns any alliance with occult teachings! <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
10 hours ago, Cos said:

how is that the same as the Watchtower agreeing with demon inspired teachings?

This is a FALSE accusation as was the accusation of the Pharisees and scribes regarding the teachings of Jesus.

10 hours ago, Cos said:

did the Watchtower use the renderings of Johannes Greber’s NT to support their own renderings of NT passages? Yes or no?

Only in that Greber's rendering is perfectly acceptable and conveys the correct meaning of the text. As do other renderings of the passage in question. The Word of God does not need the support of Greber, or any other human authority for that matter.

The reluctance of religionistas to accept that Greber could get a scriptural passage right due to his personal beliefs is quite unfounded and displays a level of prejudice and ignorance of the Word of God. Demon inspired individuals can pronounce God's truths, like it or not. We have a number of scriptural examples of this.

Unfortunately for opponents, this rather baseless accusation only serves to embarass it's proponents and display a remarkable lack of appreciation for Jesus' masterful response to the accusers of his day. "“Every kingdom divided against itself comes to ruin, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand." Matt 12:25 (Consider the context).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
11 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

This is a FALSE accusation as was the accusation of the Pharisees and scribes regarding the teachings of Jesus.

Only in that Greber's rendering is perfectly acceptable and conveys the correct meaning of the text. As do other renderings of the passage in question. The Word of God does not need the support of Greber, or any other human authority for that matter.

The reluctance of religionistas to accept that Greber could get a scriptural passage right due to his personal beliefs is quite unfounded and displays a level of prejudice and ignorance of the Word of God. Demon inspired individuals can pronounce God's truths, like it or not. We have a number of scriptural examples of this.

Unfortunately for opponents, this rather baseless accusation only serves to embarass it's proponents and display a remarkable lack of appreciation for Jesus' masterful response to the accusers of his day. "“Every kingdom divided against itself comes to ruin, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand." Matt 12:25 (Consider the context).

Gone Fishing,

 

You claim my comment "Watchtower agreeing with demon inspired teachings" is a “false accusation”, but then you contradict yourself by saying “Greber's rendering is perfectly acceptable…demon inspired individuals can pronounce God's truths”.

 

That is a contradiction sir and no wonder, just like the Watchtower, that warned its readers about Greber demon inspired NT, then goes and quotes it for support.

 

Despite knowing full well that Greber was a occultist, the Watchtower Society continually cited Greber as an authority in support for their own false teachings.

 

And in the end the Society lied outright by claiming that they were unaware of Greber’s occult association. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
21 hours ago, Cos said:

Greber's rendering is perfectly acceptable…demon inspired individuals can pronounce God's truths”...That is a contradiction sir......

There is a danger of drawing a false conclusion from your statement here. Greber's rendering of John 1:1 is not true because it is demon-inspired. It is true because it is true. That is what the Watchtower agrees with.

Satan himself quoted accurately from scripture, yet this does not detract from the truthfulness of those texts. (Luke 4:10-11). Luke was not supporting Satan by including his words in the sacred text.

Caiaphas, the High priest,  prophesied correctly in connection with Jesus death. (John 11:49-50) Although  he was one of the "offspring of vipers" (Matt.23:33) and from his "father the Devil" (John 8:44), this did not effect the truthfulnes of his utterance. The apostle John's inclusion and explanation of this man's utterance did not indicate a support for him and his wicked master. 

So there is no contradiction ...sir.

However, there is a further danger that these words of Jesus could apply to your argument if you omit to check the reasoning carefully before pressing "Submit Reply":

"Jesus said to them: “You are mistaken, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God" Matt 22:29 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On ‎9‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 3:32 PM, Gone Fishing said:

There is a danger of drawing a false conclusion from your statement here. Greber's rendering of John 1:1 is not true because it is demon-inspired. It is true because it is true. That is what the Watchtower agrees with.

Satan himself quoted accurately from scripture, yet this does not detract from the truthfulness of those texts. (Luke 4:10-11). Luke was not supporting Satan by including his words in the sacred text.

Caiaphas, the High priest,  prophesied correctly in connection with Jesus death. (John 11:49-50) Although  he was one of the "offspring of vipers" (Matt.23:33) and from his "father the Devil" (John 8:44), this did not effect the truthfulnes of his utterance. The apostle John's inclusion and explanation of this man's utterance did not indicate a support for him and his wicked master. 

So there is no contradiction ...sir.

However, there is a further danger that these words of Jesus could apply to your argument if you omit to check the reasoning carefully before pressing "Submit Reply":

"Jesus said to them: “You are mistaken, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God" Matt 22:29 

Gone fishing

 

The fact that the Watchtower lied about not knowing of Greber’s occultism should worry you…what other lies are they telling you…?

 

I showed you your contradiction. You called what I said about the Watchtower agreeing with demon inspired teachings a “false accusation”, but then you go on to support that they did agree with Greber.

 

Look, if you want I can show how the Watchtower teachings, which are in line with demon teachings, are false. Let me know and we can look at them closely.

 

Sure the Devil can quote Scripture, I never said he can’t, but he distorts what he quotes and falsely applies it, read it for yourself.<><   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I read the Greber changes. It is all supported by the Bible. Idk why a demon would tell the truth, but if you read the Bible you would know whatever it said was in harmony with the scriptures. That isn't a pass to go read Greber's translation, but the demon who told him these things were already there for mankind to read. 

 

What I am more curious about is the reason it would tell the truth, for example, in Acts 16:16+ a demon possessed girl is telling everyone that Paul will lead you to everlasting life. 16 Now it happened that as we were going to the place of prayer, a servant girl with a spirit, a demon of divination, met us. She supplied her masters with much profit by fortune-telling.  17 This girl kept following Paul and us and crying out with the words: “These men are slaves of the Most High God and are proclaiming to you the way of salvation.”  18 She kept doing this for many days. Finally Paul got tired of it and turned and said to the spirit: “I order you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour. 

 

Why would a demon tell anyone the truth about Paul? I don't understand. 

 

Again, I've heard stories of people playing with ouija boards, and they make a Bible based question and the board responds with Jehovah's Witnesses, a couple at a convention asked the board what the true religion was and it responded with JWs, so they converted, this doesn't mean that Jehovah's Witnesses are teaching the absolute truth, because 1914 is a false prophecy, but they are the only denomination that don't believe the trinity, don't worship the cross, don't celebrate pagan holidays, know the truth about death, etc. 

Rutherford claims that an angel revealed to him the identity of the great crowd, we know Angels wouldn't contact humans unless Jehovah sent them, so this was obviously an Angel of light. Does it mean the identity of the great crowd is wrong? If you read the Bible, in Revelation, you will see there are two groups of survivors, one that is numbered at 144000 and another that no man can number, is this a lie? No. 

I left Jehovah's Witnesses because I don't believe in 1914, Luke 21:8, and the fact that bethel was practicing spiritism. But the rest of the stuff they teach is and I believe Jehovah's Witnesses are being misled by the man of lawlessness in 2 thessalonians 2, and from what I have heard over the years, demons usually tell 50% truth and 50% lies. I don't know why they do the things they do, because even Jesus said a house divided does not work, so maybe the angel of light had some new ideas after Jesus said that. I just want people to become aware of the mystery of this lawlessness surrounding 1914. 

If you read the sahidic coptic new testament, which the oldest New testament known to man, you will see the correct rendering of John 1:1, which is the word was a God, not a god, nor God, but a God. Greek doesn't use indefinite articles, which is why "a" couldn't have possibly existed at the time John 1:1 was written. Secondly, Jesus is MonoGenes, begotten, made, he has not always existed and in Philippians 2:5 it says he isn't equal to the father, the trinity is false. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 9/8/2017 at 3:01 PM, Gone Fishing said:

Only in that Greber's rendering is perfectly acceptable and conveys the correct meaning of the text.

And so this makes it ok to accept teachings from demon inspired people, when God prohibits it? I'm not sure about you, but my God does not approve and tells me that through His word we can gather all the teachings He wants us to know by the means of the Holy Spirit.

John 16:13-15

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Shiwiii said:

ok to accept teachings from demon inspired people

The teaching was not Greber's. It is merely of interest that his translation is in harmony with the truth which proceeded him.

Jehovah can interfere with any source of "inspired" teaching and turn it to His own ends if He wishes. He has demonstrated this amply. I'll let you figure out where and when.

1 hour ago, Shiwiii said:

YES IT DOES

OH NO IT DOESN'T

This is getting a bit Punch and Judy. I'm off before the big stick comes out......................................:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Similar Content

    • By Bible Speaks
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. "And the spirit and the bride keep on saying, “Come!” and let anyone hearing say, “Come!” and let anyone thirsting come; let anyone who wishes take life’s water free." (Revelation 22:17) NWT
      jw.org
      IMG_4542.MP4





×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.