The French Speaking Baptist Church of Stratford is now located in the former Jehovah's Witnesses Kingdom Hall at 494 Milford Point Road.

[Srecko Sostar]

9 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

Jehovah’s Witnesses do not consider or have considered a building as consecrated ground that it cannot be moved

Dedicated or consecrated (sorry for my lack of English language knowledge)  point is very clear. How would you look at your bro/sis in congregation  who decide to sell his house to people who openly said to him how house will be used for something that Bible teaching condemn or say it is bad? 

There is a saying how we always have a choice. Not only between two possibilities, but more than two. In this  trade with real estate WT JW organization have free will to choose buyer. And because of "spiritual" reasons to sell, even for lesser price, to somebody who will not promote"false teachings" :)))

As verbs the difference between consecrate and dedicate

 is that consecrate is to declare, or otherwise make something holy while dedicate is to set apart for a deity or for religious purposes; consecrate.

As adjectives the difference between consecrate and dedicate

 is that consecrate is consecrated; devoted; dedicated; sacred while dedicate is (obsolete) dedicated; set apart; devoted; consecrated.                  - source: https://wikidiff.com/consecrate/dedicate

 

[Matthew9969]

Religion is big business, so seeing as how the WTBTS is in bed with the great harlot as well, it's not surprising they would sell a kingdom hall to another church.

[Witness]

6 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

As verbs the difference between consecrate and dedicate

 is that consecrate is to declare, or otherwise make something holy while dedicate is to set apart for a deity or for religious purposes; consecrate.

Consecrate:  make or declare (something, typically a church) sacred; dedicate formally to a religious or divine purpose.

Thanks, Srecko, they are one in the same, as you pointed out.

15 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

While there was a difference between Charles Taze Russell’s understanding of the definition of the word “dedication” and “consecration” it does not diminish todays understanding by Jehovah’s witnesses that understand what an “acceptable” dedication really means.

Something the Presidents, Vice Presidents, and Governing Body have been correct to apply after 1934.

Jehovah’s Witnesses do not consider or have considered a building as consecrated ground that it cannot be moved, just like the “ark of the covenant” was, constantly; moved.

I believe Jesus action in cleansing the temple can be considered. It should be correctly understood the consecration, portion is something that should be given to any building at the time of worship.

So, these transitory buildings that are temporarily consecrated/dedicated for worship can be compared to the ark of the covenant?  God was in complete control of its movement, since it housed His Spirit. Only His priesthood was allowed to move it.  Josh 3:17   In the case of kingdom halls, men are in complete control of its use; when it should be discarded and another built.  In the meantime, these buildings are called the dwelling place of God’s Spirit – God’s house.  This appears to be a matter of convenience.   Unless I’m missing what you’re getting at, I don’t see the comparison at all to the ark of the covenant. 

15 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

No one needs to accept the writings of individuals. They don’t need to accept the Watchtower. You only need, to compare and understand what Jehovah witnesses, teachings are based on to accept their doctrine. They accept Jehovah’s word, along with Christ instructions.

Christ’s instructions:

Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you will neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, worship the Father. ²² You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews. ²³ But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. ²⁴ God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”  John 4:21-24

Worshiping in this way, doesn’t take any building to be consecrated or dedicated to do so; not even a mountain-like organization.  Jesus made this clear when he said, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”  That temple was the dwelling place of God, but Christ became the chief cornerstone of the new spiritual Temple, built on the apostles and prophets and all faithful, sealed "living stones" throughout the last 2,000 years.  John 2:19,21,22; 1 Pet 2:5,9; 1 Cor 12:28; Eph 2:20; Rev 21:14

Stephen clarified it this way: “However, the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands, as the prophet says:

⁴⁹ ‘Heaven is My throne,
And earth is My footstool.
What house will you build for Me? says the Lord,
Or what is the place of My rest?
⁵⁰ Has My hand not made all these things?’  Acts 7:48-50

I can imagine when a JW walks into a kingdom hall, assembly hall, and most definitely, a Bethel; thoughts are, that God’s presence in Spirit resides within the building.  This is why Bethels are decorated and pristinely presented, as a tribute to “Jehovah”. It is considered a “spiritual house”.   Is it all an illusion? Well, yes it is.   Can a JW separate the building from God, and God from the building? 

So if we are God’s children, we shouldn’t think that the divine being is like an image made from gold, silver, or stone, an image that is the product of human imagination and skill. ³⁰ “God overlooked the times when people didn’t know any better. But now he commands everyone everywhere to turn to him and change the way they think and act. ³¹ He has set a day when he is going to judge the world with justice, and he will use a man he has appointed to do this. God has given proof to everyone that he will do this by bringing that man back to life.”  Acts 17:29-31

There is only one exclusive dwelling acceptable to be God’s house – His Temple:

1 Pet 2:5,9 - you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house (“into the temple of the Spirit”) to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.   But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

1 Cor 3:16 – “Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst?”

If God has chosen His dwelling in the anointed, what right does man have to formulate their own and claim God has blessed it? 

2 Cor 6:16 - What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.”

Eph 2:20-22 - Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, ²⁰ built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. ²¹ In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. ²² And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

The “living stones”, the “royal priesthood” and dwelling of God, is right among the JWs.  Do they notice?  No, they notice their kingdom halls, assembly halls and Bethels, as landmarks of God’s dwelling places; replaced when needed with more work of their hands.  Rom 1:25

Regarding the dwelling place of God's Spirit, would you say that the organization has accepted God's Word through His Son, Jesus Christ?

 

 

 

[Ray Devereaux]

13 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

There is a saying how we always have a choice. Not only between two possibilities, but more than two. In this  trade with real estate WT JW organization has (corrected by spell check) free will to choose buyer. And because of "spiritual" reasons to sell, even for lesser price, to somebody who will not promote"false teachings" :)))

Can Jehovah witnesses be held liable for the personal action of a single person? Can they be held liable for the decision the Baptist church uses the building they bought? If they decide to worship Baal in that old Kingdom Hall, it is not the Watchtower position to condemn such false teachings.

For those of you that don’t understand scripture. Dedication is a personal action while consecration is a position.

The difference is on the person, place or thing, a group of united followers wish to use to worship the almighty.

You may wish to start with the understanding, Christ is the church. Is the Body of Christ a building? Did Jesus not use the temple? Perhaps by visiting JW.org, these questions can be made clear.

I will remind the readers there is a vast difference between the Bible Student Zion Watchtower, and the Jehovah Witnesses Watchtower. Those differences must not be compared, since doctrine does differ.

[Witness]

15 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

The difference is on the person, place or thing, a group of united followers wish to use to worship the almighty.

You may wish to start with the understanding, Christ is the church. Is the Body of Christ a building? Did Jesus not use the temple?

The building of kingdom halls is looked upon as bringing “honor to Jehovah”, and it is not by coincidence that the Warwick Bethel has as its address, 1 Kings Drive. (1 Kings 8:13)  Buildings mean something  sacred to JWs.  I have watched a JW video of an assembly hall compared to the early temple,and how it must be treated with care as the early temple was.    They have great value as a place of consecrated worship.  Does it bring “honor to Jehovah” when these dedicated buildings are put up for sale?   If you say this thought would not be applicable at such a time, then how would anyone know that building a kingdom hall to begin with, brought "honor to Jehovah"?  How is it, one knows that God receives honor at the completion of  building a kh, but not privy to what He thinks when the 'for sale' sign is posted?

It is the hypocrisy, that is in play.  Hypocrisy and the idolatry of placing spiritual value in the work of man's hands.  Ps 135:15  

[Srecko Sostar]

8 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

Can Jehovah witnesses be held liable for the personal action of a single person?

In general view, it is not reasonable to expect how some bro/sis in Honduras (or anywhere in the World) is/are responsible for act of JW lawyer or GB member who making more or less important decisions on activity of Organization.

8 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

Can they be held liable for the decision the Baptist church uses the building they bought?

The same as above :)

8 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

If they decide to worship Baal in that old Kingdom Hall, it is not the Watchtower position to condemn such false teachings.

:)) WT JW Organization position is to point with "finger" how some/many religious beliefs and practice of Christendom and other religions is/are "condemn" by Bible through WT JW organization publications and representatives and rank and file members.

8 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

I will remind the readers there is a vast difference between the Bible Student Zion Watchtower, and the Jehovah Witnesses Watchtower. Those differences must not be compared, since doctrine does differ.

This would be interesting to discuss :))

[Ray Devereaux]

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

In general view, it is not reasonable to expect how some bro/sis in Honduras (or anywhere in the World) is/are responsible for act of JW lawyer or GB member who making more or less important decisions on activity of Organization.

This is true. No one can be held responsible for the action of another. This is why the Governing Body cannot be held responsible for the actions of individual witnesses and members who attend meetings but are not baptized.  The Governing Body is held accountable by Jehovah himself. 

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

:)) WT JW Organization position is to point with "finger" how some/many religious beliefs and practice of Christendom and other religions is/are "condemn" by Bible through WT JW organization publications and representatives and rank and file members.

Can this not be said of other religions that condemn Jehovah witnesses for just about everything? The only thing left would be, condemn witnesses for the air they breathe.

I have no doubt Jehovah witnesses consider their K.H. as a consecrated place of worship while they are worshipping Jehovah at the time of use. I can see where any place can be considered consecrated ground for the purpose of worship.

When Jehovah witnesses use other building to conduct such as circuit or regional assemblies, I don’t see where they would own such property to use as consecrated ground to accommodate a larger audience of worshippers.

I can relate where in California, Jehovah witnesses purchased a Baptist Church to hold their weekly meetings. Can I say because it was purchased by another religion, that building in stained?

I believe the destruction of Jehovah’s House also confirms the looseness in the use of the word consecration. I also believe, when the Philistines captured the Ark, 1 Samuel 4, an instrument of Jehovah, can we say; while the ark was in the Philistine’s possession, was it held on consecrated ground?

*** w51 7/15 p. 431 Expansion of Theocracy in Indonesia and Singapore ***

On Sunday morning 45 turned up at the Victoria Theatre to hear a discourse on baptism, after which 5 persons symbolized their consecration to do God’s will by being immersed in a pond near the edge of the city. The question now was, How would the public respond to the advertising for the public lecture, “Proclaim Liberty Throughout All the Land”? At 4 p.m. came the answer. We saw the ground floor of the theater filled with an audience of 307 persons, which, considering the restricted avenues of publicity available due to municipal ordinances and emergency regulations, was a splendid result.

I recall, Joseph F Rutherford had to sell almost all the Watchtower assets to continue running the Watchtower, after his release from prison.

I believe there is an overreach with these definitions. I don’t recall where, Jehovah witnesses are fanatics as to consider the issue of consecrated ground, they couldn’t sell the original Tower in Pennsylvania and the original Headquarter in New York.

The fact that Russia confiscated all Watchtower material that includes Kingdom Halls can also be considered.

[Anna]

On 9/9/2019 at 10:18 PM, Jack Ryan said:

"JW's only" who love to segregate themselves and post paradise pictures and only think good sweet thoughts.

They like their "ears tickled"

What do you know?

[Srecko Sostar]

17 hours ago, Ray Devereaux said:

No one can be held responsible for the action of another.

This go to sphere of hierarchy.

Parents are responsible to their minor children. Boss is responsible for his employee. Commander is responsible for his soldier. Church /leaders) is responsible for believers. 

Why? Because instructions, lessons, direction for acting, guiding etc. coming from those people who are in power and making influence on lower levels of group. In that sense GB carrying responsibility and have to bear effect/ outcome of decisions they have put on members as obligation that they must do or not to do.  

 

[Anna]

On 9/9/2019 at 6:51 PM, Ray Devereaux said:

I don't believe this can ever happen. I would recommend witnesses pass the word around to stay off this site.

This club is open to anyone. If you want to join a JW only club here it is:

 

[Anna]

12 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

This go to sphere of hierarchy.

Parents are responsible to their minor children. Boss is responsible for his employee. Commander is responsible for his soldier. Church /leaders) is responsible for believers. 

Why? Because instructions, lessons, direction for acting, guiding etc. coming from those people who are in power and making influence on lower levels of group. In that sense GB carrying responsibility and have to bear effect/ outcome of decisions they have put on members as obligation that they must do or not to do.  

 

It's a little bit more complex than that. Yes, parent's are definitely responsible for their minor children, even when their minor children are out of  sight, the responsibility for what the children do is still the parents, because the parents should be watching them.  However, is an employer responsible for what his employee does outside his employment? If the employee does something bad while on vacation (robs a bank) would his employer bear responsibility? Obviously not. Now if the employer planned the robbery with the employee, and got the employee to carry it out, then the employer will hold some liability. But it is still the employees choice, whether to go along with the plan or not. I don't think the claim "he made me do it" would hold up in court.

It always seems to me that when people try to hold the GB responsible for their choices in life, its like they forget that no one actually MADE them do anything. That it was the persons personal conviction, that whatever the direction the GB gave was correct, and therefor they followed it. We have to make the choice whether to follow it or not. Now if the direction proved wrong, then sure, we can blame the GB for the bad outcome, but it was STILL our choice and we have to get up and move on.

[Anna]

On 9/10/2019 at 9:58 PM, Witness said:

The building of kingdom halls is looked upon as bringing “honor to Jehovah”, and it is not by coincidence that the Warwick Bethel has as its address, 1 Kings Drive. (1 Kings 8:13)  Buildings mean something  sacred to JWs.  I have watched a JW video of an assembly hall compared to the early temple,and how it must be treated with care as the early temple was.    They have great value as a place of consecrated worship.  Does it bring “honor to Jehovah” when these dedicated buildings are put up for sale?   If you say this thought would not be applicable at such a time, then how would anyone know that building a kingdom hall to begin with, brought "honor to Jehovah"?  How is it, one knows that God receives honor at the completion of  building a kh, but not privy to what He thinks when the 'for sale' sign is posted?

It is the hypocrisy, that is in play.  Hypocrisy and the idolatry of placing spiritual value in the work of man's hands.  Ps 135:15  

Something is only as good as what it is on the inside.  Any structure has value to the Witnesses when it is used for pure worship. I know an old church that was converted to a KH. So it's not about the building, but about what goes on on the inside. Once a building stops being used for the purpose it was built for and is put on the market, it becomes immaterial to the JWs what or who occupies it after that. This proves there is no idolatry or placing of spiritual value on the building itself.