Triumph1300
Well-Known Member
I guess that's why JW don't celebrate Christmas. And birthdays.
Legalism at it's best.
Last edited:
Controversial... Hence debate forum.
- Thread starter Brakelite
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I guess that's why JW don't celebrate Christmas. And birthdays.
Legalism at it's best.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
People can add all manner of things to their worship....it doesn't mean that God approves of them however.
When Israel introduced elements of false worship God punished them. He strictly prohibited any false religious practices and yet Christendom is full of them.
Paul's words at 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 are totally ignored by those who claim Jesus as their "Lord". Any wonder he says "I never knew you"....and calls them "workers of lawlessness". (Matthew 7:21-23)
Both sides may have "accepted what Jesus did" in giving his life.....but he clearly will not apply the value of his sacrifice to law breakers.
LOL...we will see whom Jesus accepts as his own and whom he rejects at the judgment.....God's laws are very important to Jesus.
What a shame that they are not important to those who think that adopting pagan practices is OK with God. Does he turn a blind eye to the worship of pagan gods and the customs that are carried over from them....(Luke 16:10)
We will let him tell us that....shall we?
Legalism you say....? That tells me that you have no idea what the "legalism" of the Pharisees was really all about.
Worshiping and/or surrendering to and having faith in, the true God is indeed a salvation issue. Believing the words, prophecies, and promises of that true God can be salvational, as our faith in His Word can directly affect how we respond to the gospel.
The Word was God... And the Word became flesh.
He who doesn't have the Son, doesn't have the Father.
KJV 1 John 2:4
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
KJV Isaiah 8:20
20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
Yep. Inherited many of them from the great apostate counterfeit in Rome. But the JWs don't practice or believe in any of them do they?
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
We examined all of Christendom's beliefs under scrutiny from the Bible and from ancient historical records, and when we found their origins were not biblical, we dismissed them in accord with 2 Corinthians 6:14-18.
Since all false worship can be traced back to Babylon, it isn't just the "great apostate counterfeit in Rome" that created the problem.....it merely contributed most of it to "Christianity". It is not satan's only form of false worship. He has the whole world covered. (1 John 5:19)
Our present calendar (courtesy of Pope Gregory) was not full of Catholic names for the days and months of the year, was it? Norse gods feature prominently too so there was another influence. The Greeks too added their ideas...but all have a common source.
Drawing from ancient Babylon we can find false religious ideas in many ancient cultures and religions. This is why we are commanded to "get out of" "Babylon the great" (Revelation 18:4-5) which we believe is satan's world empire of false worship.....it has a common thread of beliefs running through all religions which are alienated from God.
You will find belief in an immortal soul that departs from the body at death.......to go on to a heaven of bliss for the "good" people, contrasted with a hell of eternal fiery torment for the wicked. But most importantly you will find a multiplicity of gods, often in triads...yet you will find none of these concepts in God's word.
How do you think God's "people" got to be in "Babylon the great" in the first place?
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
That is NOT what John 1:1 says in Greek....the Word was not "ho theos"(meaning Yahweh) but was simply "theos" (a word used for any divine personage, god or goddess.) You are still mixing up divinity with deity. There is only one deity and that is Yahweh. Jesus is never once referred to as Yahweh.
But because it suits you to stick to pro-trinitarian translations....I guess you really don't care that it is blasphemous to call God's Son an equal deity with his Father.....? Since satan is also called "theos" you might want to research the word....it simply means "a god"...any god or one with divine authority.
Indeed....who can 'have the Son' if he is considered equal to his own God? Jesus said..."no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” So unless you have the right view of the Son, the Father will never give you that invitation.
The Father is the God of Jesus even in heaven (Revelation 3:12).....you keep ignoring scripture that disagrees with your 'bi-nitarian' beliefs. But your disbelief really alters nothing about the nature of God, which was revealed to the Jews through Moses and to the Christians through Jesus Christ. Nothing altered that singular nature of the Father because the counterfeit Roman church wanted to change the nature of God and introduce this false doctrine into that counterfeit church.
Can you apply those verses equally to yourself....?
Last edited:
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
You just can't see what is plainly written....Jesus was resurrected as a spirit as the scripture says...read it again...Paul said...
"So also it is written: “The first man, Adam, became a living person.” The last Adam was a life-giving spirit."
Peter said that Jesus was "put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit" (1 Peter 3:18)....wouldn't Peter and Paul know better than you, since Jesus appeared to both of them after his resurrection?
He wasn't a spirit when he died.....he was a human.....but he was raised as a spirit...as the scripture says.....give it up....you really are flogging a dead horse mate.
Jehovah’s Witnesses like to point to a few verses in support of their claim. Their go-to proof text for the non-physical resurrection is 1 Corinthians 15:42–44. Here Paul is contrasting the earthly body with the resurrected body. The earthly body is perishable, dishonorable, weak, and natural. The resurrected body is imperishable, glorious, powerful, and spiritual.
So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural [psychikos] body; it is raised a spiritual [pneumatikos] body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. (1 Cor. 15:42–44)
The Jehovah’s Witness will say, “See, Paul describes our present, earthly bodies as ‘natural,’ and our future, resurrected bodies as ‘spiritual.’” However, they wrongly assume that natural and spiritual mean physical and nonphysical, respectively. The question is: What does Paul mean by the terms “natural” and “spiritual”?
Paul uses the exact same words earlier in his first letter to the Corinthians. He writes,
The natural [psychikos] person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual [pneumatikos] person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. (1 Cor. 2:14–15)
Notice the natural person does not mean a physical person, but rather a person oriented toward human nature or soul. In fact, psychikos, which is translated “natural,” literally means soul-ish. Similarly, the spiritual person does not mean a non-physical, spirit person. Rather, it’s a person oriented toward the Spirit. Paul is contrasting soul-led persons with Spirit-led persons. The contrast is not one of physicality, but of orientation.
Therefore, Paul is explaining that the future resurrected body will be freed from slavery to the weak, mortal, dishonorable, sinful human nature. The resurrected body will be led, sustained, empowered, and made glorious by the Spirit. As Christians, we believe in a future bodily, physical, spiritual resurrection, because this is what the New Testament teaches.
The above facts align perfectly with Jesus telling the apostles He was NOT a spirit, but has a body of flesh and bones, whereas the watchtower claims result in making Jesus a deceptive liar.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1 The words of John 1:1 are probably the most debated in Scripture. Volumes have been written attempting to explain them. Most of the discussions concern what John meant by the phrase “and the Word was God”. Some have said that John meant to say that Christ was divine or had a divine nature but the fact is if this is what he wanted to say then other Greek words were available to Him. One of these, amongst others, is θεῖος (theios). The beloved physician Luke wrote (note the difference in the three translations of this same verse) “Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead [ θεῖος – theios] is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.” Acts 17:29 KJV εῖος – theios] "Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature [θ is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man.” Acts 17:29) NASB εῖος – theios] “So, since we are children of God, we shouldn't suppose that God's essence [θ resembles gold, silver or stone shaped by human technique and imagination.” Acts 17:29 The Complete Jewish Bible In order to translate θεῖος, both the New American Standard Bible and the Complete Jewish Bible, like other modern translations, do not use the word Godhead. Instead they say “Divine Nature” and “God’s essence” etc. The word θεῖος therefore, if John had wanted to use it, was available to him. In fact it is quite possible that John had read what Luke had written. It is also possible he had read the other Gospels, also what Paul and Peter had written. Remember, John’s Gospel was written around the end of the 1st same Greek word (θεῖος) is translated here “According as his divine [ century. Notice how this θεῖος] power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature [ θεῖος] , having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.:” 2 Peter 1:3-4 As we can see, Peter refers to “divine nature [ θεῖος]”. If at John 1:1c John had only meant to say that Christ had a divine nature then this is the way he could have written it. As it was he used theos. This is the same word, although without the definite article, that he used at John 1b. Even if John had written that Christ was divine (or had a divine nature etc.), it would still mean that He is God. Someone cannot have a divine nature and not be God. Pertaining to personal
beings we are only aware of three classes of nature. This is divine nature, the nature of angels, and human nature. In His pre-existence, Christ was none of the latter two therefore He could only be divine. In personality though, He was not the Father. He was the Son of God. Some have maintained that because John said “the Word was with God ( τὸν Θεόν – ton theon), which can be translated as ‘the Word was with the God’, that when He wrote, “the Word was God ( Θεὸς - theos)” (without the definite article), he is saying that “the Word” is not actually God. This I believe is a misunderstanding of the thought that the Holy Spirit was leading John to convey. I believe that John was ensuring that his readers would take him to mean that the Word was God but not the same person as the Father. To put it another way: John was delineating between God the Father (whom the Word was with) and the Word (who became flesh) yet saying at the same time they were both God. Quite recently I came across a study of John 1:1 that I found very interesting. It pointed out that in John’s writings alone (John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John and the Revelation), there are a total of 252 usages of theos. The study also noted that 22 of these are without the definite article (John 1:1c, 1:6, 12, 13, 18, 3:2, 21, 6:45, 8:54, 9:16, 33, 13:3, 16:30, 19:7, 20:17(2), 1 John 3:2, 4:12, 2 John 3, 9 and Revelation 21:7) yet all are translated God. Four of the instances (not counting John 1:1) are in the prologue to John’s Gospel (verses 1:1-18). Never though would we think of any of these as referring to anyone except God Himself: neither would we say any should be understood in a qualitative sense. The conclusion is therefore that the absence of the article does not necessarily mean that it has to be preceded by an indefinite article (in English), neither does it necessitate the word simply being regarded as qualitative.
There is another very important point to consider here. This is that because of the context in which a word is used it can change in meaning. A word does not mean exactly the same every time it is used. This applies to any language. This is certainly the case in English. When determining what an author means by the use of a particular word, context is the all-important factor. John was the only Gospel writer to use the word ‘theos’ with respect to Jesus. As we noted above, John’s Gospel is a divine theology. Concerning the identity of Christ it was amongst the final revelations that God, through the Bible writers, would give to man. In this respect it should be studied with eager anticipation
Triumph1300
Well-Known Member
The very apparent disagreement between Jehovah's witnesses and Christians is their view of Jesus Christ.
That sums it up.
One more thing:
Jesus Christ: "But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven."
Not much more to add.
That sums it up.
One more thing:
Jesus Christ: "But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven."
Not much more to add.
Last edited:
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
“Denying” him also means denying his role as “The Word”...one who has always spoken God’s words to others, from “the beginning”. What beginning? The immortal and infinite Creator had no beginning.
If Jesus is equally “God” how is one part of God able to become a human on earth and talk to that other equal part of himself which was still in heaven? That is two gods. And if the Holy Spirit is off doing other things, that is three gods all acting independently. How is that one God? It sounds more like multiple personality disorder.....
How is it that Jesus is appointed as our “mediator between God and men” if he too is equally God? Why don’t we need a mediator between us and Jesus?
How is it that he calls the Father “my God” even in heaven? (Revelation 3:12)
Your trinity is a clear divider, it is true....but IMO, not in the way you think....or want.
Your contributions here are pretty much nothing but an excuse to whine.....I am left to wonder...is that all you can do?
“Not much more to add”? Is that because you had nothing to contribute but negatives in the first place? If this is a debate forum...where your scriptural retorts?
Can you please show us your counter arguments to the questions I have raised....I am all ears.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Question for you....what is a “soul” in the scriptures....both in Hebrew and Greek...?
What does “soul-ish” actually mean according to that definition?
Where do you envision these “bodies” will dwell? Is heaven another planet where these “bodies” can survive outside of earth’s atmosphere?
Where did Jesus go to “prepare a place” for his elect?
Where will these “future bodily, physical, spiritual” resurrected “souls” live?
And who is “we”? What “Christians” believe this?
The Watchtower is a Bible Society...its a printery.....we are not the Watchtower....
Since Jesus does not lie and neither do we, it simply reveals that Jesus was in a materialised body to prevent his disciples from breaking God’s law and communicating with spirits. (This was to prevent spiritism and spiritistic practices) Why do you suppose that the faithful angels always materialised in human form to convey God’s messages to his earthly servants? The voices heard did not come out of thin air. The angels that came to Abraham and Lot were in human form...so was Gabriel in his visitations to both Daniel and Mary.
God’s spirit did not speak audibly to those who were guided by it. Peter’s encounter with Ananias and Sapphira confirm that. It spoke inwardly.
The only time a non visible voice spoke is when God himself confirmed the role of his son and man’s obligation to “listen to him”.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Oh you mean the Sabbath? I see..the SDA’s hold this to be still binding on Christians but the Bible does not say that it is part of God’s law that it is still binding on Christians.
How do we know this?
When the Jewish Christians were trying to force the Gentile brothers to get circumcised (which was also part of God’s law) the Elders and apostles in Jerusalem needed to clear up this divisive issue.
After prayer and study of the scriptures the elders came to an unanimous decision which was passed to all the congregations by letter and by word of mouth....meaning that all were to abide by this edict.
They wrote....
“Since we have heard that some went out from among us and caused you trouble with what they have said, trying to subvert you, although we did not give them any instructions, 25 we have come to a unanimous decision to choose men to send to you together with our beloved Barʹna·bas and Paul, 26 men who have given up their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We are therefore sending Judas and Silas, so that they also may report the same things by word of mouth. 28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you except these necessary things: 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!” (Acts 15:24-29)
The “necessary things” did not include the Sabbath, which was only ever given to the Jews, who could continue to observe it if they wished, but it was no longer binding on Christians who were not Jewish by birth. And even for the Jews, it was part of the old law that ended with Christ and the new covenant. (Romans 10:4; Romans 7:6)
I hope that addresses your question....Christians are not bound to keep the Sabbath or any other Jewish law except the two most important ones reiterated by Jesus.
A Christian could not break either one of those laws without breaking them all. So instead of a set of written laws that the Jews interpreted to suit themselves, Christians were now to operate by the use of their own conscience with laws written on hearts, not parchment.
Amazing how you denigrate Christianity for everything, then use the same unbiblical lame excuses as everyone else for your disobedience. Perhaps you'd like to read through the discussion... Why do Adventists obsess about the Sabbath. All your excuses and straw men and imaginative responses are answered in that discussion.
The covenant that you want so badly to put yourself under, that was given on mount Sinai, is bondage, and slavery, per Galatians 4:21-31.
The 10 Commandments that include the fourth command, that you want so badly to keep, have ended, were the Ministry of death and condemnation, and the letter that kills, per 2 Corinthians chapter 3.
It’s called that because the penalty for breaking many of them was death by stoning, under the law of Moses, including the fourth command, which God said if you even do minor work like gathering sticks on the Sabbath, you must be put to death.
So the SDA isn’t doing very well, as they are in bondage and slavery, and are keeping the letter which kills and that brings death and condemnation.
Last edited:
Angels are spirits - and they have immortal spirit bodies: they don’t just put on a man suit , or rent a body from Bodies R Us, to appear to us - they already have one.
That angels have bodies is shown by the fact that some angels are already in hell, and are in chains there, and for committing sexual sins like sodom did - you can’t chain a spirit.
Jud 1:6 He has also held in eternal chains those angels who did not keep their own position but abandoned their assigned place. They are held in deepest darkness for judgment on the great day.
Jud 1:7 Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities near them, which like them committed sexual sins and pursued homosexual activities, serve as an example of the punishment of eternal fire.
Bodiless spirits also can’t commit sexual sins.
Satan the fallen angel also gets put in chains,for 1,000 years, in Revelation 20.
God the Father is a spirit, yet He showed His ‘backside” to Moses in Exodus 33.
Before that in 33:11, God talked with Moses FACE TO FACE, “as a man talks with a friend” while He hid it in a cloud.
God has a face, a hand, and a backside - He therefore has a spirit body.
Exo 33:23 And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.
Jesus appeared after His resurrection in His risen spirit body, that has flesh and bones, instead of flesh and blood.
Last edited:
So obeying God's Commandments are now death and condemnation? It used to be death and condemnation when you didn't obey God. When did that all change?
Try reading all of Galatians. It’s about the exact error of the SDA and E G White.
Similar threads
