JMAN05:


Christ presence began in 1914 according to bible chronology.

italo:

The new covenant doesn't contradict the old. It reveals it. It fulfils it.

You "sower is satan" teaching contradicts your "sower is Jesus" teaching.

This contradiction is of the devil, not God, no?

JMAN05:

Granted it fulfilled it, but it also abolished it. It contradicted it in many respects. the law allowed all sabath observance, but the new one didnt. the law made circumcision a requirement, the new one didnt. the law made israel a special people, the new one didnt, the law authorised killing for some crimes, the new one didnt. Habah! many many more na.

JMAN05:

I never saw where he claimed inspiration from God. the truth we discover is by the leading of the spirit, but it comes gradually. Not that we hear a special voice from God, nor possess miraculous power like people of old. It is God's leading cos we discover those truths from the bible. This never mean we dont make mistakes as humans, but an INSPIRED word from God doesnt make mistakes. this we dont claim to possess. We do not possess that miraculous power to know.

However, even God presents His truths gradually. When God instituted the Mosaic law, He made no mistake cos that was a step to another step. So when the time came, He removed that law. can we now say that the former truth(the law) has been replaced by another truth(law of christ)? No. God is rather unveiling the truth, not replacing it.

I think that is what that article want to buttress in one of the points it made above.

So was the circumcision issue. in the bible book of Amos, God had shown that people of the gentiles will come in, but He never revealled it until after pentacost, when James quoted it. But that scripture has been there when the teaching of circumcision was taught, but God never allowed any to know it then, until the jerusalem meeting. compare also Dan. 12:4

so light shines brighter and brighter. that is God's way of leading His people. though some mistakes could be out of human error, we cannot also dismiss the fact that truth come gradually.

JMAN05:
Current understanding bro. light gets brighter each day.

JMAN05:

Maybe your not responding to this is a nod of approval. I repeat:

That doesnt mean a bad
spirit took over, no. Just like a bad
spirit didnt institute the law and
later removed it.
A bad spirit didnt institute John's
baptism and later replaced it with
Jesus baptism. truth comes
gradually.

And these are people who claim inspiration.

JMAN05:
They are not leaders of JWs, but fellow workers who work much harder. Christ is the leader and head.



Bla bla bla means you have nothing to say. thanks, we are moving humbly to the brighter light. Had others been so humble, many false teaching would have been jettisoned by now. I really appreciate their humility. had they claimed infallibility like "inspired" and fallibly Pope, I wouldnt have been a Witness.

True, false prophesy is wrong, however, that Deutronomy means those who claim INSPIRATION from God. We dont.

If you are serious, respond to my point the way it should be.

italo: @JMAN05,

If your light gets brighter each day, why do you keep going back to what you taught before you moved onto "brighter light?" E.g

1903 - 'Lord' refers to Jesus.
1940 - 'Lord' refers to Jehovah.
1978 - 'Lord' refers to Jesus.
1980 - 'Lord' refers to Jehovah.

Which one is the brighter light now?

Is it 1980 or 1978?

If 1980, which is the same as 1940, it means you moved back to darkness in 1978, meanwhile, then you called it brighter light.

How can evil liars like you be trusted?

italo:

The new covenant doesn't contradict the old. It reveals it. It fulfils it.

You "sower is satan" teaching contradicts your "sower is Jesus" teaching.

This contradiction is of the devil, not God, no?

woky: pls explain..

italo: @JMAN05,

If your light gets brighter each day, why do you keep going back to what you taught before you moved onto "brighter light?" E.g

1903 - 'Lord' refers to Jesus.
1940 - 'Lord' refers to Jehovah.
1978 - 'Lord' refers to Jesus.
1980 - 'Lord' refers to Jehovah.

Which one is the brighter light now?

Is it 1980 or 1978?

If 1980, which is the same as 1940, it means you moved back to darkness in 1978, meanwhile, then you called it brighter light.

How can evil liars like you be trusted?

italo:

All these things arent contradictions. All these old laws are still permissible in certain ways.

Even killing is still permissible in certain instances...like just war, an armed shooter etc.

Moreover, even the old covenant repeatedly prepares us for the new. It tells us numerous times that the new is coming. It tells us of this fulfilment.

Relate that to your "sower is satan" "satan is Jesus" lies!

Who revealed the first and who revealed the second?

God or satan?

try69:

NO!!! I'd rather by reason say lights goes back and forth(flip flop) and that's not of God bro

Flip flops would either be "ON" or "OFF"

If I use the flip flop logic, I can conclude thus;

Resurrection of the Men of Sodom

1879 - ON
1952 - OFF
1965 - ON
1988 - OFF

The 'Lord' in Romans 10:12-16

1903 - OFF
1940 - ON
1978 - OFF
1980 - ON

'Higher Powers' of Romans 13:1

1916 - OFF
1943 - ON
1964 - OFF

Do you now see my emphasis?
Do you notice that these dates span?
By the ways, what are the newer explanations of these?
Do you notice confusion?
If you don't claim inspiration, then how do you draw your conclusion on scriptures? literal? Reason? Logic? Science? Divine inspiration? Just what?




Your reason here is flawed;

My reasons(again I'd use the flip flop logic);

* This is no flip flop (back and forth), I'd rather call it a complement. i.e (water : water and the spirit)
* This is not catastrophic like predicting the end more than ones (back and forth) without any luck
*Jesus didn't void john's baptism and then come back to validate it.(No back and forth movements)

Are we clear now?




Bla bla bla. and Deuteronomy 18:21-22 means nothing inspired would come from a lineage of lies and frequent fallibility..

Bla bla bla also mean I don't want to delve just yet.

I'm not responding to your points; Reason can be seen in deut 18:21-22

Or peharps till you tell us where you get your inspiration from.

italo:

When you say "God's truths...gradually," you mean the countless lies you have told?

The bold is a deception.

You call yourselves "God's Spirit-directed Prophet"

Is there such a thing as an uninspired prophet?

italo: @JMAN05

Have Jehovah's Witnesses ever taught anything scripturally incorrect?

Can Jehovah's Witnesses possibly be teaching anything scripturally incorrect now?

Be careful with your answers o. By now you know we have tonnes of evidence to disgrace you if you lie again.

JMAN05:

1. Ya, we ve made mistakes and admitted it. But you claim your popes are infallible, can you say they are really infallible? Your answer pls.

JMAN05:
2. Maybe, but I dont know how. Can you identify them?

JMAN05:
3. We are not deterred by what people say. Many choose to stick to a wrong teaching because of fear to lose face. we dont do that. We are the ones who even publicly proclaim our mistakes. It isnt easy to do, but that is what humility and teachableness calls for. Who else will God like to use if not humble fellows.

JMAN05:
After all some can see that their teachings are wrong, even receiving internal criticism, yet they stick to it cos they fear the ambarasment it brings. But we are not like that. If catholic had been humble they would have changed so many unscriptural teachings that even their scholars criticize. Leading to different groups with contradictory beliefs in a single church.

JMAN05:
As many are backwards, we are meters in the forefront in terms of bible understanding. and are still moving.

italo:

We both know there are countless threads on Catholicism where we have been answering your questions. You can open another one on Papal infallibility.

This one is about JWs. It is your turn to defend your false doctrines. Why are you desperate to make it about the Pope. Is there something you're hiding. Was it the Pope that made you lie against God many times?

If you are probably making mistakes, why do you go about condemning other people when you could well be wrong about anything and/or everything?[/auote]

I could PROBABLY. You are not sure whether I am mistaken. You better prove my believe wrong now. You ve not said anything here ooooooooo.

I should criticise others because my current understanding shows they are mistaken. and you know what? changes we make has not ALWAYS been the same with what others teach, rather it becomes something much different from others. So we do not direct new light but it directs us thru the spirit.

Peter received the no-gentile notion and held tightly to it cos there was no indication that God was going to lead them to another thing. but truths come gradually. You cant predict whether or not it will move.

[quote]Many times, you have lied about your false prophecies (not mistakes). A humble fellow doesnt lie and say it was God that said.


How can you tell for sure who is wrong when you could be mistaken again?

You could well be wrong again. Probably, you know nothing about the Bible.

JMAN05:

We are not inspired. and you dont sound serious.

We are not infallible yet fallible Popes.

arsenalwenger: I will rather believe a policeman interpretation of scriptures than the Jehovah's witness. So much inconsistency and rehearsed response frm my JW friend.

It is only a JW that will be told in his kingdom hall on hw to respond to a particular question posed to him in the public. This is pure dogmatic and never give room for personal reasoning and judgment. U must accept what the governing body tells u hook line and sinker without objection, even if such teachin is vry false.

try69:

I don't sound serious I'd leave that for readers to judge because twice I have proved you wrong

I talked about back and forth teachings and you pointed out modified or once-changed teaching, how do those correlate?

italo: @JMAN05,

I say whay JWs teach with evidence from your publication.

You say it is not your current teaching WITHOUT evidence that it is not.

I ask you if you teach that heaven got filled in 1935.

You pretend like you didnt see it.

How do we go about proving your teachings wrong when you dont own up to your teachings?

JMAN05:

1. we do not hold to all those teachings you stated. I dont even know where to start and where to end. ok, you can tell me the one you need our current position on.

2. we thought that the number will be complete in 1935. but after that year, some new people began to declare that the spirit bear them witness to be in heaven. You cant tell them no, neither can you say yes.

It is also noteworthy that some of these people could be those who came from churhes into the truth. Some of them do change the heavenly thought with time cos in there church they cant reconcile the idea that a righteous person will be here on earth. but after getting the accurate knowledge that those who will be on earth are still righteous ones, they change their thinking.

The fact is that you can never say with certainty the number that has been anointed to be in heaven. You can do that to some, but not all. that is our position. that is why i ignored that one. it is still among the past i ve been talking about.

true2god: @JMAN05, can a non-JW (who is a christian and fears God a lot) marry a JW?

true2god: U r one of the few honest JWs i have seen recently. Of course we human can make mistakes, but its another thing to admit the error and learn frm it.

Ok my question to u is, since most of the years fixed (1925, 1935---berth sarim, 1975---armageddon, 1984---forever will shall live on paradise earth, where it was taught that generation that experience WW1 will not die before armagedon) earlier by the JW had been admitted as mistakes (dnt wanna use error), dont u think that their 1914 is also a mistake that JW dnt wanna jettison.

Note that for all those years i listed, JWs admitted they make mistakes and are not perfect (note that WTS never still admitted that they make any mistake, but members admit). So my question to u is this, since the watchtower society (WTS) used a special calculation (only knwn to dem) to arrive at 1925, 1935, 1975 and 1984 (1914+'70) and all these years were confirmed false given their escatholigical teachings, dont u think that 1914 is also false? If 1914 is also false (as 99% of xtains belief), y is WTS still holdin unto it as an official year of christ's invisible presence (tho' the Bible didnt not teach any invisible presence)?

Pls clarify.

loveroftruth: @Jman05

you are trying your best here, but it is obviouse that you are not in a position to address some of what is being posted here as you are unable to seperate facts from fiction.
You are a honest guy, and honest people can always see the honesty of the JW in their search of God's word.

Take note that most of the dates that is being posted here have nothing to do with Jw and certain accusations here are plain false hood.

That some decide to type 1880, 1900, 1914, 1935, 1960, 1975, 1980, 2000 does not make it true because you have 1914 in the list.

The Jw preach about God's kingdom, does not mean that they preach dates, the bible chronology is their own excersis to enhance understanding of all aspects of what the scriptures says.

Though the Jw sees 1914 as the beginning of christ presence, do they preach that as they knock on peoples houses ? No, but it is well documented and will be shown to bible lovers and it builds faith in God and the bible. That the semi atheist you see here go to ati JW web sight and copy and pest information does not make it true.

For a start, Jw have done nothing wrong for saying this is what we see from the bible.

The words of Jesus says 'DAY' and 'HOUR' no one knows, and Jw naver said this day or that hour anywhere befor, so, all what they are doing here is simple Jealousy and hatrade for this bible students.

If i see any imformation or chronology from the bible and publish it, it is now a crime for speaking what i see ? Wao!

So, Jman, let any of them post a doctrin that the JW preach about from house to house like

"No hell fire, no trinity, soul is not Immortal, all righteouse persons are not going to heaven" etc.

They think that if they can propergate scandal on the head of JW, then, Jw will not preach again, whose interest are they serving ?

So, learn to ignore some baseless accusations when you see them.

Anybody that wants to know about 1914 date, should welcome the next Jw that knocks on their doors which they will surely do, and ask what 1914 is all about, and see the bible based calculation for himself.

Propagander is not suposed to be a 'true christian' thing.

JMAN05:

And I have stated that some mistakes could be out of human error. when u keep repeating what has been attended to, u dont sound serious. I keep saying that we are fallible, but we shouldnt dismiss the fact that truth comes gradually.

woky: sorry to say this, You ar not honest