billybalke
Member
And JW's MUST accept all doctrines of their Watch Tower.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Had a jehovah witness show up at my place today....
- Thread starter gr8grace3
- Start date
And JW's MUST accept all doctrines of their Watch Tower.
I don't really understand how anyone could accept ALL the doctrine of any church.
If I'm not mistaken, JW's are the worst.
If one leaves the church, they are shunned by their entire family. (that are JW's).
billybalke
Member
The church revealed in the scripture does not make up doctrine itself but is the pillar and ground of the truth , I Timothy 3:15. It is that truth recorded in the NT.--God bless, Billy
TO BE DEEP IN SCRIPTURE IS TO CEASE BEING CATHOLIC, PROTESTANT OR JEW
Rom.16:16
Very well stated, Free.
There are essential doctrines that need to be believed to be Christian.. One of those is the deity of Christ, which JWs don't believe. See the expose of them in Walter Martin's, Kingdom of the Cults.
That makes them a cult & not an orthodox Christian group.
Oz
R
Runner
Guest
"Orthodox Christian" and "Christian" are not necessarily the same thing. The JW are unquestionably not "orthodox" Christians. To a Baptist, the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics are not "orthodox" Christians. Free Grace Christians are not "orthodox" Christians to most other Christians.
The question is, where does "non-orthodox" end and "non-Christian" begin?
This was the point of my thread "Give us your absolute bottom-line Christian essentials" on the Apologetics forum. What are the essentials - not the "orthodox" understandings - for being a Christian? Given a direct opportunity to state the absolute essentials, damn few people stepped up to the plate. The silence was deafening.
Is the deity of Christ an essential? The JW believe Jesus is God's chosen vehicle for salvation, that salvation is through the life, atoning sacrifice and resurrection of Jesus. I believe this is the essential.
We believe in Jesus, who said: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6) We have faith that Jesus came to earth from heaven and gave his perfect human life as a ransom sacrifice. (Matthew 20:28) His death and resurrection make it possible for those exercising faith in him to gain everlasting life. (John 3:16) We also believe that Jesus is now ruling as King of God’s heavenly Kingdom, which will soon bring peace to the entire earth. (Revelation 11:15) However, we take Jesus at his word when he said: “The Father is greater than I am.” (John 14:28) So we do not worship Jesus, as we do not believe that he is Almighty God.
Source: https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/believe-in-jesus/
Is the above the "orthodox" understanding? No. As one delves deeper, one learns that the JW's understanding is somewhat more "unorthodox" than the above suggests. It is quite a leap, however, to suggest that this makes them non-Christian, a leap that I am not willing to make.Source: https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/believe-in-jesus/
Matthew 7:16 says we will know false prophets by their fruits. In my experience, JW exhibit the fruits of the Spirit to a higher degree than almost any other community of believers.
The notion that "orthodox" (always, of course, meaning "my particular understanding of orthodoxy") defines "Christian" is one of the really huge, divisive mistakes.
That Jesus was "divine" in some sense does indeed date back to the earliest Christian community. The notion that he is God, the Second Person of the Trinity, does not. The JW believe Jesus is divine; they do not believe He is God. Their position is non-mainstream, non-orthodox, but I do not see it as non-Christian.
chessman
Member
Hogwash:
1 John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, in order that we may know the one who is true, and we are in the one who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This one is the true God and eternal life.
billybalke
Member
- "Is the deity of Christ essential"? By ALL means. If proven by scripture that He IS as well AS the Holy Spirit,then to deny Deity is to be an atheist. The JWs teach Jesus to be a created angel, the angel Michael, while the scripture teaches otherwise, Heb.1.
dirtfarmer
Member
hello Runner, dirtfarmer here
Are you making the statement that you belong to the JW organization.
If Jesus and the Father are one, does that not state the Jesus was God. Christians(Christ followers) understand that Jesus was God. If any one doesn't believe that, then they are not Christians.
R
Runner
Guest
No. Read the thread.
No, he is not saying that.
But read through the thread. Loss of salvation,workers for salvation........will sound a LOT like the JW's and kinda need them to be Christians to argue for their own righteousness/lifestyle for their salvation. They count on their morality,kindness,lovey dovey feelings the same as JW's for their salvation..........And not the work of the Lord Jesus Christ(in his humanity as GOD) for their salvation.
They are doing their 'duty' to be saved in the end and counting on their morality and OWN good for their salvation.
Acts 16:31, John 3:16.......just isn't enough.
Post #~~15
Telling Him the true Gospel of The Lord Jesus Christ is SHUTTING the door in His face?
I sat down with the fella for 25 to 30 minutes........and the conclusion made........Nothing but the Gospel is going to get through to him.
But I digress, He sounded like 99.5% of the CHRISTIANS here who FIGHT for doing their 'duty' to be saved. Like being dunked in a tank of water to be saved.
Last edited:
JohnDB
Member
JW's don't use the same Bible that everyone else uses. They have "retranslated" the scriptures that no reasonable Greek and Latin scholar would in order to make changes to support their doctrine.
In the past they have died in droves because of their stance on blood transfusions, organ transplants, immunizations and other medical advances. And don't forget that they also have gone way past their own predicted end of the world date (in the '80's).
In the past they have died in droves because of their stance on blood transfusions, organ transplants, immunizations and other medical advances. And don't forget that they also have gone way past their own predicted end of the world date (in the '80's).
R
Runner
Guest
1 John 5:20 is a verse that has long been pointed to by Trinitarians and disputed by others. Whether the second sentence is referring to Jesus was debated, even by Trinitarians, long before the JW were even a gleam in Charles Taze Russell's eye.
You choose to use the woodenly literalistic and often awkward LEB, which by beginning the second sentence "This one" could be read to suggest a reference to Jesus. The New American Standard Bible, which I prefer and which is also very accurate, translates the second sentence as "This is the true God and eternal life." When one reads all of 1 John 5, where the author repeatedly and carefully distinguishes between God and Jesus the Son, it seems highly unlikely that he would suddenly refer to Jesus as God in verse 20. From what I have read, scholars indicate that the second sentence could refer to Jesus, to God as described in all the preceding verses, or even to both God and Jesus.
Trinitarians are obviously going to seize upon the "Jesus" interpretation. Because I accept the doctrine of the Trinity, I have no quibble this interpretation of 1 John 5:20. The fact remains, however, that the early Christian community had no clear understanding of Jesus as the Second Person of a Trinity. They understood Him as the divine Son.
As has been discussed on the recent thread about the Trinity, the doctrine evolved in fits and starts and was finally formulated in the fourth century through a process of debate, discussion, negotiation and exercise of political power. This is the historical reality. Instead of simply stringing Bible verses, why not educate yourself with a book like The Quest for the Trinity: The Doctrine of God in Scripture, History and Modernity, https://www.amazon.com/Quest-Trinity-Doctrine-Scripture-Modernity/dp/0830839860, which is as good a summary of the history of the doctrine as I have seen?
My statement, "That Jesus was 'divine' in some sense does indeed date back to the earliest Christian community. The notion that he is God, the Second Person of the Trinity, does not," is precisely correct. You can string together all the Bible verses you want to support the Trinity, but the fact is that the earliest Christians did not see a Trinity in the verses you now cite.
My statement does not become "hogwash" simply because you disagree with it and can cite a disputed verse that arguably supports the Trinity.
Folks, save your breath. I will stipulate that you regard the Trinity as a Christian essential. I don't. End of discussion.
Last edited by a moderator:
R
Runner
Guest
Well, yes and no. I don't quite follow why they equate the archangel Michael with Jesus in His heavenly role as the Son, but they do. In their eyes, this does not diminish Jesus ("just another angel") but rather explains His exalted status. Here is a discussion, for those who just can't get enough of this stuff: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/who-is-michael-the-archangel-jesus/.
Here is what they specifically say about Jesus, https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/who-is-jesus-christ/:
Jesus is Jehovah’s most precious Son—and for good reason. He is called “the firstborn of all creation,” for he was God’s first creation. (Colossians 1:15) There is something else that makes this Son special. He is the “only-begotten Son.” (John 3:16) This means that Jesus is the only one directly created by God. Jesus is also the only one whom God used when He created all other things. (Colossians 1:16) Then, too, Jesus is called “the Word.” (John 1:14) This tells us that he spoke for God, no doubt delivering messages and instructions to the Father’s other sons, both spirit and human.
It is obviously non-Trinitarian. You are free to regard it as un-Christian. I do not. God will cast the deciding vote.
To Grow in His Grace and knowledge and mature as a Christian it is ESSENTIAL. It is a revealed doctrine, and part of the mystery doctrine revealed to the Church.
If you are using 'christian essentials' as knowing this and believing this for our salvation, I agree. It may take us years to have even a simple grasp of the trinity after we are saved.
We believe/trust in the Lord Jesus Christ's work ALONE on the Cross for our salvation. God sent His Son for us, and died and rose again for us and our sins........we believe/trust in His work alone and we are saved.
The problem today....is that most don't trust Christ alone and His work alone..........that is essential Christian doctrine for SALVATION.
R
Runner
Guest
Again, yes and no. Their New World Translation has received favorable reviews by a number of noted Bible scholars. It is not free of doctrinal bias - just the consistent translation of God's name as "Jehovah" makes this clear. But it is by no means some nut-case, wild-and-crazy translation. Don't take my word for it, read the Wikipedia discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Translation_of_the_Holy_Scriptures. Because the JW are such a lightning rod for other Christians, it is inevitable that the New World Translation is condemned by evangelical sorts who feel obligated to condemn everything associated with the JW. When I read the JW literature, as I do almost every month, I often compare their quotations from the Bible with my very accurate New American Standard Bible. Yes, there are some differences, occasionally reflecting a doctrinal bias, but nothing just completely off the scale.
They refuse blood transfusions on biblical grounds. The remainder of your statement is incorrect.
The JW have also repeatedly taken courageous stands other Christians lacked the conviction to take and have "died in droves" as a result. As one example, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jehovah's_Witnesses_in_Nazi_Germany.
The JW strongly implied on biblical grounds that Armageddon would occur in 1975, and they have indeed had to play a number of games with dates to prop up their theology over the decades. On the other hand, when I was with Campus Crusade, a distinctly non-JW ministry, we were more or less assured that the Second Coming would occur in 1972. I listen often on Sunday mornings to Jan Markell and her "Understanding the Times" radio program, another distinctly non-JW ministry that emphasizes End Times goofiness; Jan and her crew of "Bible prophecy experts" are always careful to leave themselves an "out," but if Jesus doesn't return in the next ten years, they are going to have some serious egg on their faces. The fact is, a far broader spectrum of Christianity than just the JW has a long and embarrassing tradition of failed predictions and warnings without anyone suggesting this makes them non-Christian.
billybalke
Member
I note first of all you made no note of Heb.1 which definitely teaches Jesus could not possibly be a created angel. Even the NWT shows this to be true.
Of Col.1:15,16 please note vs. 16 and 17. If Jesus created ALL things as vs. 16 says , how then COULD HE BE A CREATED BEING?? This would mean He created Himself!! Such nonsense deserves no further comment.
Question: Are you a JW? Or, do you sympathize with their doctrines? If so, I ask you to join me on the one on one for a study for ALL to read.
TO BE DEEP IN SCRIPTURE IS TO CEASE BEING CATHOLIC, PROTESTANT OR JEW!
Rom.16:16
God bless, Billy
R
Runner
Guest
If you happen to believe that the fourth century councils and their creeds were inspired by God, then perhaps this is true. I don't happen to believe that. Although I accept the doctrine of the Trinity based on my own study and prayer, I believe it is entirely possible to read the Bible and to be a believing Christian without recognizing the Son as the Second Person of a Trinity. The OT Jews had no concept of a Trinity. Jesus never spoke directly about a Trinity, which seems distinctly odd. The Trinity must be implied, primarily from the Gospel of John, and the early Christian community had no clear concept of a Trinity.
That is basically the sense in which I am using "essentials." Even as a Trinitarian and a very long-time Christian, I don't believe we have any real grasp of the Trinity at all. It is a human way of speaking about a transcendent reality that really cannot be expressed in human terms. The "essentials," I believe, are (1) recognizing that one is a sinner who is estranged from God and needs God's forgiveness, and (2) recognizing that the life, atoning death and resurrection of the Son of God make this forgiveness possible. (There is simply no way to read the Bible without recognizing Jesus as the unique Son of God.)
I don't want to sound like a JW apologist in any sense other than emphasizing that I do regard the JW as my Christian brothers and sisters, but the following is their understanding. I realize they have some doctrines such as the JW being the only true church and the 144,000 elect ruling in heaven while the rest of them occupy the restored earth, but the following from the JW website is pretty much Salvation 101 from a Once Saved Not Always Saved perspective, which happens to be my own as well:
God’s Son, Jesus Christ, paid for our sins by dying for us. His ransom sacrifice made forgiveness possible. It is a gift from God.—Read Romans 3:23, 24. To gain salvation, you must exercise faith in Jesus and demonstrate that faith by obeying his commands.—Acts 4:10, 12; Romans 10:9, 10;Hebrews 5:9. The Bible shows that you must have works, or acts of obedience, to prove that your faith is alive. (James 2:24, 26) However, this does not mean that you can earn salvation. It is “God’s gift” based on his “undeserved kindness,” or “grace.”—Ephesians 2:8, 9; King James Version.
I know that Christian Forums does not want promotion of the JW theology, so I am going to drop off this thread before my posts start to strike people this way. I am not defending JW theology - by their theology, I myself am in big trouble since I'm not a JW! - merely explaining why I regard them as my Christian brothers and sisters.
R
Runner
Guest
Come on, READ THE THREAD!!! I get SO TIRED of people who jump into the middle of a thread without having the faintest idea of the discussion prior to the point at which they jump in. I have NO GREATER INTEREST in JW theology than in Catholic theology, Mormon theology, Methodist theology or billybalke theology (whatever that may be). I have a very scholarly interest in all of Christian theology, but none of it means squat to me since I am completely secure in Runner's theology. Find another foil for whatever JW-bashing you have in mind.
Hebrews 1:4, referring to Jesus, states: "Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they." The JW do not teach that Jesus is a "created angel." They teach that He is the only begotten Son of God. They teach that He is the firstborn of creation, that the begetting of Him was God's first act of creation. They teach that everything that was created (as opposed to begotten) was created through and for Him. Based on the biblical descriptions of things the Archangel Michael does, they conclude that the biblical references to Michael must refer to Jesus in His pre-incarnation heavenly state. They believe that the Archangel Michael is in a different category from the mere angels Hebrews 1 is talking about.
Apart from the equation of Jesus with Michael, which is really of no interest to me, none of the foregoing strikes me as un-Christian. Non-Trinitarian, yes. Unorthodox, yes. Un-Christian, no. If it troubles you, TAKE IT UP WITH THE JW.
This thread is not about whether the JW have the "correct doctrines." The issue is whether what they believe DISQUALIFIES THEM from being considered brothers and sisters in Christ. I say no, you say yes, and the JW say we don't really care what either one of you thinks. This thread started with someone suggesting the JW are lost, obviously anticipating nothing but a chorus of cheers. I dissented, whereupon the thread took the predictable turn it has. Sorry to sound snarky, but I am done with this thread.
Last edited by a moderator:
JohnDB
Member
Sorry if I don't believe the Wikipedia article...I've lived through their history. I've watched people stunned into indecision of how to deal with their wacko theologies that literally killed many people who didn't have to die.
In the end they got a real problem of showing loving kindness because of their imaginations. So I want nothing to do with them.
billybalke
Member
Php 4:7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.
Php 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.
EDITED reba
Php 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.
EDITED reba
Last edited by a moderator: