Vchlady, what about this belief espoused by JW that Jesus Christ came back to the world in 1914? Explain.

Meanwhile, read this link.

http://www.bibletopics.com/BIBLESTUDY/91.htm

so do u buddy!!!!!!!!!! Get the right interpreting of the Bible before u try 2 go off preaching!!!! BOOBBYAF

Its in my blood, but I'd rather see myself as a teacher than a preacher. I notice you have not been able to disprove all I have said so far using the bible. I honestly wish you'd at least try. All of you JWs sound the same, programmed! None of you dare step out the box and see the bible for what it is.

As I said only God can deliver you!

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

I notice you have not been able to disprove all I have said so far using the bible. I honestly wish you'd at least try.

Quite a number of your assumptions have been laid to rest using the Bible; so this oft-repeated chant is a bit worn out now.

Bobbyaf:

All of you JWs sound the same, programmed! None of you dare step out the box and see the bible for what it is.

It's just about the same thing with so many people - even within SDA people are programmed; so it's no big deal.

The funny thing is that it's easier for people to allege that others are "programmed", this or that; especially when doing so from within the matrix of any particular denomination of one's choice.

The JWs have unsound doctrines on many issues; but have we carefully looked into those that are most cherished within our own denominations?

So Gwaine that includes you too it seems, right?

Stop fooling yourself All JEHOVA WITNESSESS re pretender i know them very well ok

@ sojiboy

Stop fooling yourself All JEHOVA WITNESSESS re pretender i know them very well ok

That is not a fair statement to make. You are not in a position to question someone's sincerity regardless of whether you think they have or don't have the truth. In all fairness you have to assume that everyone is seeking the truth until proven otherwise.

Its our duty to show the way rather than turn off people from hearing what is being shared.

I don't have any thing again JWs, but i have a question. Why is it that JWs don't like praying b/4 preaching?

I guess they do; only that they aren't hypocritical about it. In all sincerity I've been with them at their kingdom hall preparing to go and preach and seen them praying about their ministry and people they are going to preach to. Very surprising, you'd say. And I've seen them very much in the neighbourhood praying before starting their Bible study.

I guess they aren't just like all these other religious groups that try to impress folks with prayers and what have. I guess, they aren't praying to please anyone. I can assure you they do like praying before preaching, but not anyhow, as it is with christendom.

And scripturally, consider: Matthew Chapter Six; Verses six to eight. Then, Matthew Chapter Ten, Verses Twelve, Thirteen.

My own observation!

@ ricadelide

@vchlady,
you say you follow the bible; what do you know about what Jesus Christ came to do for man?
I'd be awaiting your reply.

They have their own version of the bible that has been translated in such a manner so as to hide the truth about the deity of Christ. Its one of the most inconsistent versions I have ever read. Its no wonder they are a confused over the issues. let me give you an example:

Heb. 1:8. "God is your throne forever" (a nonsensical statement) is put intead of "your throne, O God, is forever," because this statement refers to Christ.

Look at Genesis 2:1-2 and notice how complex the sentence construction is. 1 Thus the heavens and the earth and all their army came to their completion. 2 And by the seventh day God came to the completion of his work that he had made, and he proceeded to rest on the seventh day from all his work that he had made.

Notice the phrase in bold. God "proceeded to rest" The hebrew specifically states that "God rested" but becasue the JWs do not believe that a day in creation is a literal one, they used the expression proceeded to rest to indicate the long time it took God to commence resting. When one proceeds to do something that one has not yet begun to do the action as yet. If I proceed to cleam my desk it doesn't say if and when I would have started cleaning. The phrase only indicates that I have the intention to do the act, or I may have begun to move towards my desk. Hence there can be no closure to the activiy itself, until the past tense is used, and not the past continuous.

But when you visit their bible and look at the book of Hebrews and its account of the creation you will notice the contradiction. In Hebrews 1:4 this is what is quoted, 4 For in one place he has said of the seventh day as follows: “And God rested on the seventh day from all his works,”

Notice the use of the past tense as it relates to God having rested?

I rest my case.

@ bobbyaf

Well let them believe watever they wish to, it's their fate.

And they argue alot about the scriptures with all forms of controversial statements.

It's a pity really.

Bobbyaf dear,

I won't shy away from my intimate association with the JWs.
That aside, I put these Bible portions before you for clear explanations:
John 14:28/Rev 3:5,12- may I ask if Jesus is the same as the Almighty God?
John 17:3; 20:17- may I ask if Jesus believed in only ONE TRUE GOD Mark 12:29?

, proceeded or what?
Your definition of 'to proceed' startled me; and it smacked of all efforts by you to misrepresent the truth of the scriptures. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary says as regard 'proceed' as a verb: 1. to continue doing sth that has already been started; to continue being done. 2. to do sth next after having done sth else first. 3. to move or travel in a particular direction.

Can you please, dear, reconsider your 'own' definition of 'proceed' as regard number 2? From what I have learnt from the JWs, they CERTAINLY believed God rested from his creative works as regard the earth. Yes, he rested on the seventh day!

, and whether the days are literal or not?
No one should be dogmatic about this? Why, in the eyes of the Creator a thousand years is just like a day in the eyes of God! Ponder 2Peter 3:8. Does it sink?

Rather than appeal to others' reasoining faculty, you tend to insult their sensibility and reasoning. It is sacrilegious to twist scriptural truths- we must be very careful; it is also very un-christlike to misrepresent others! Because we don't like, does not mean we should lie. Or, as Jesus would have asked you: Who appointed you Judge over others?

, and will I be leaving this out: what do you mean when you mentioned the deity of Christ?
Take care to care!

@ ademiife

I won't shy away from my intimate association with the JWs. That aside, I put these Bible portions before you for clear explanations:

John 14:28 You have heard Me say to you, ‘I am going away and coming back to you.’ If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said,[a] ‘I am going to the Father,’ for My Father is greater than I.

I have said it before but let me repeat it again. The role of Jesus was to completely submitt Himself to His Father. Paul made it clear in Phillipians 2 when he spoke to the issue of Christ's humility. Let us take another look at the issue.

Phil. 2:5-8
5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.

Have you noticed verse 6 that categorically states that Christ "thought it not robbery to be equal with God"? Why do you think that Paul would see the need to qualify Christ's position before He humbled Himself. It was to ensure that there could have been no doubt about Christ deity.

Rev 3:5,12

5 He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

Jesus spoke as our High priest in heaven.

12 He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on him My new name.

Yes Jesus uses the word God as it applies to His Father, but that usage in and of itself does not speak to issue of Christ not being equal to His Father. It speaks to His continued role even after His victory over sin.  

/Rev 3:5,12- may I ask if Jesus is the same as the Almighty God?
John 17:3; 20:17- may I ask if Jesus believed in only ONE TRUE GOD Mark 12:29?

Jesus is not the same person that much I know, but He is very much Almighty. Revelation 1:8 says that. 8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”

Notice how the use of the word "Lord" as you people always seem to stress, is written in lower case. Your own rule has betrayed you for there can be no doubt that the person that John saw walking among the 7 golden candlestiks was Jesus Himself, who describes Himself as "Almighty"

The JWs have always taught that Christ was a created being, yet you all have also said that He is "a god" based on your interpretation of John 1.

If the Father is the only true God then where does that leave Jesus? According to your ideas you cannot have two true Gods can you? And if Jesus was created then how can the Father encourage Him to be worshiped and praised when He Himself said that He will not share His glory with another. Yet listen as John speaks:

8 Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. Rev.5:8

11 Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne, the living creatures, and the elders; and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, 12 saying with a loud voice: Worthy is the Lamb who was slain To receive power and riches and wisdom, And strength and honor and glory and blessing!” 13 And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying: “ Blessing and honor and glory and power Be to Him who sits on the throne, And to the Lamb, forever and ever!”

According to the teachings of the JWs God would be inconsistent to allow a creature to be worshipped. How does that scenario fits into this passage of scripture?

Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘ I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God. Isaiah 44:6

Notice Jesus' prayer in the garden, 5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. John 17:5

Its clear as crystal that Jesus in His pre-existent form shared the same glory with His Father.

Your definition of 'to proceed' startled me; and it smacked of all efforts by you to misrepresent the truth of the scriptures. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary says as regard 'proceed' as a verb: 1. to continue doing sth that has already been started; to continue being done. 2. to do sth next after having done sth else first. 3. to move or travel in a particular direction.

You cannot use a dictionary to defne the contextual meaning or application of words.

The word proceeded as used in your version is not the main verb, and thus acts as an auxillary. When you say that someone proceeded to rest, when you should have simply repeated what the original Hebrew said, which was "God rested" who is being more dis-ingenious, or who is mis-representing the truth?

If one uses the verb "proceeded" alone then its meaning is different than when it is used with another verb. For example If I were to say "let me proceed", it would mean let me continue. The word however denotes a continuous action, and not a complete action. If on the other hand I use the verb along side another verb, the use of the helper verb adds new meaning to the main verb, by qualifying its tense. In this case "proceeded" as used in your version does not make the action a past and complete action. It makes it a past continuous, meaning that the action may have started in the past but not completed, or the action may have been intended to start but because the intention was expressed in the past the word "proceeded" was used.

Can you please, dear, reconsider your 'own' definition of 'proceed' as regard number 2? From what I have learnt from the JWs, they CERTAINLY believed God rested from his creative works as regard the earth. Yes, he rested on the seventh day!

So why didn't they just say rested instead of saying he proceeded to rest? Which is simpler? Can't you see that such expressions give the wrong ideas?

and whether the days are literal or not? No one should be dogmatic about this? Why, in the eyes of the Creator a thousand years is just like a day in the eyes of God! Ponder 2Peter 3:8. Does it sink?

In fact the days are literal. 2 Peter 3:8 has nothing to do with the days of creation. It has to do with the way people and God see time. What we may consider a long time is just a blink to God, and vice verse. So please, !

Its funny that the JWs are saying that now. I can recall sometime go, or some years ago it was the same JWs who used to teach that the days of creation were not literal, and that each of those days of creation represented a period of time, and at one stage that period was 1000 years. As a child I used to read your books, and that was taught in your books. Do you recall the book "Paradise lost, Paradise restored" ?  

Rather than appeal to others' reasoining faculty, you tend to insult their sensibility and reasoning. It is sacrilegious to twist scriptural truths- we must be very careful;

Thanks for the advice but make sure you heed it as well.

Bobbyaf:

@ ricadelide

They have their own version of the bible that has been translated in such a manner so as to hide the truth about the deity of Christ. Its one of the most inconsistent versions I have ever read. Its no wonder they are a confused over the issues. let me give you an example:

Heb. 1:8. "God is your throne forever" (a nonsensical statement) is put intead of "your throne, O God, is forever," because this statement refers to Christ.

Look at Genesis 2:1-2 and notice how complex the sentence construction is. 1 Thus the heavens and the earth and all their army came to their completion. 2 And by the seventh day God came to the completion of his work that he had made, and he proceeded to rest on the seventh day from all his work that he had made.

Notice the phrase in bold. God "proceeded to rest" The hebrew specifically states that "God rested" but becasue the JWs do not believe that a day in creation is a literal one, they used the expression proceeded to rest to indicate the long time it took God to commence resting. When one proceeds to do something that one has not yet begun to do the action as yet. If I proceed to cleam my desk it doesn't say if and when I would have started cleaning. The phrase only indicates that I have the intention to do the act, or I may have begun to move towards my desk. Hence there can be no closure to the activiy itself, until the past tense is used, and not the past continuous.

But when you visit their bible and look at the book of Hebrews and its account of the creation you will notice the contradiction. In Hebrews 1:4 this is what is quoted, 4 For in one place he has said of the seventh day as follows: “And God rested on the seventh day from all his works,”

Notice the use of the past tense as it relates to God having rested?

I rest my case.

thanks bobbyaf. I know about all those - i've argued with many of them before - that's why i asked that question. I even had their bible at one point. (For example, John 1;1 is rendered as; in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was a god.)
I was hoping she'd reply though but she didn't. If one rejects the very core teachings of the faith, i really wonder what's left to beleive. Anyways, i pray for them.

I get you bro,

Somebody help me to interprete what Colossians 1:15 says. "He(Jesus Christ) is the image of the invisibe God, the first born of all creations"

Although imperfect people they obey all the identifying marks of true religion.do u want me to tell u some of the marks?

Yes. And make sure you tell us how you came about them, too.

Just like Orhodox Muslim are so Strict.  Jehovah Witnesses are the Strictest Christiaans In the Teachin They are like Monks. 
more pics https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-4050.32.html#msg1167067

Who are the orthodox Muslims?

Where did you get the idea that the Jehovah Witnesses are like the monks?

Tel B no say to u please.  You was Bashing Muslims I don't want to talk to u man.  Monks are strict on their teachin.  Simile Mister.
@topic
Yes they are so tru, But not the only true religion

@ djl

Somebody help me to interprete what Colossians 1:15 says. "He(Jesus Christ) is the image of the invisibe God, the first born of all creations"

Christ being the image of the Invisible God would mean that Christ is the ultimate revelation of His Father. Its almost like a mirrow image of an object. That is why Jesus said "If you see me you see the Father"

The expression first-born of all creation simply means that Christ as a human is pre-eminent among all humans. In other words it is Christ who deserves all focus and attention above evry other being of creation by virtue of His sacrifice.

I am aware that the JWs have used the phrase first-born to suggest that Christ was first created by His Father and was later given the power to create. However, the phrase is not unique to the NT. It derived out of the OT.

The phrase was attributed only to sons that were born first in a jewish family who had right of birth, as well as those boys that were born after a girl, but were still called first-born. Noticed that boys who were born second after a girl were still referred to as first-borns? This is why Jesus was seen as the first-born among creation although He was not literally the first to be born, if you see what I am saying. Paul is simply stressing His pre-emminence.

Notice too how Paul refers to Christ as the first-born among the dead in Collosians 1:18. Does Paul want to convey the idea that Christ was the first to be dead and resurrected literally? Obviously not. Once again he stresses the fact that Christ rising from the dead carried more pre-eminence and importance.

Regards.

as bobby has said, seeing as no one had ever seen God, JC was simply SHOWING them what God is like in terms of his nature and what he represents.

Col. 1:15 - Who [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature.

Two issues are presented before us here:

(a) Jesus being the image of the invisible God

(b) Jesus being the firstborn of every creature

When context and language constructs are considered on this verse, the inference that is unmistakable is that Jesus Himself IS the image of God in the fulness of the divine expression of all that God represents. This is also given in Heb. 1:3 where Jesus is called "the express image of his [God's] person". In Col. 1:15, the apostle encapsulates all that the Son has been revealed to be in His Person - right from creation in Genesis 1:26, through the theophanies of the history of Israel, right into the NT. In Christ Jesus, God is fully revealed.

That He is the "first born every creature" is as has been noted, His preeminence in all things - whether they be in heaven, on earth, or beneath the earth.

Bobbyaf, Thanks for your kind words of response.

As humans, we are all set in some certain things or ways. Beliefs, habits and reasoning. One truth remains: it is best to argue, to reason, to express one's conviction without being egotistical, dogmatic or fanatical. We may never agree but we must display enough decorum to respect what others believe and are convinced about. We should/can only appeal to others' sense of reasoning in line with us.

It is unchristlike to disparage others. Consider Jude 9.

You may never want to agree with the JWs. You really don't have to. But you have that moral duty, that human conscience to respect the right of everyone to be whatever they want to be. In my view, the much hate or embittered words some use against the JWs really show how unchristianlike these folks are. Remember what the Lord Jesus said at Matthew 7:21-24?

How would you want to be talked to if someone is speaking against your faith? Matthew 7:12

There's so much I'd love to discuss with you but time will fail us; it's not about winning you over but setting some things into finer sense of contemplation.

Take good care of yourself.

Please Bobbyaf,
What's your view on these scriptures:
1Co 11: 3; 1Co 15:24-25, 27-28?

Expecting your kind response,

The expression first-born of all creation simply means that Christ as a human is pre-eminent among all humans. In other words it is Christ who deserves all focus and attention above evry other being of creation by virtue of His sacrifice.

I am aware that the JWs have used the phrase first-born to suggest that Christ was first created by His Father and was later given the power to create. However, the phrase is not unique to the NT. It derived out of the OT.

Hahaaaa!Bobbyaf, are u sure with the interpretation that you gave to this verse. "the first borne of all 'CREATION' not of humans alonecould only mean the first of all things created, wether in heaveh, earth , even underneath the earth. Now looking intently at the verse , I can only see that the best interpretation to that verse is that given by the JW's

The Jehovah's Witnesses racist message and racism that white is good, and brown, red, and yellow are bad is quite blatant. With more than two million Jehovah's Witnesses, of multi races and nationalities that are a part of the organization, why aren't any of the prophets, prophetesses, princes, princesses, priests, Adam and Eve, Jesus, or pharaohs of a different race than Caucasian? Moreover, please don't say that it doesn't matter because if it didn't, then they all wouldn't be Caucasians. Moreover, if it really didn't “matter” you wouldn't have made any pictures at all!

@Horus,

Horus:

The Jehovah's Witnesses racist message and racism that white is good, and brown, red, and yellow are bad is quite blatant. With more than two million Jehovah's Witnesses, of multi races and nationalities that are a part of the organization, why aren't any of the prophets, prophetesses, princes, princesses, priests, Adam and Eve, Jesus, or pharaohs of a different race than Caucasian?

# Since the colour of your "black jesus" matters so much to you, what has that "black jesus" done for YOU and your racist movement?

Horus:

Moreover, please don't say that it doesn't matter because if it didn't, then they all wouldn't be Caucasians.

# Are there any "whites" as well in your own group; or is your group too scared of their own shadows that they would rather disclaim their true identities?

Horus:

Moreover, if it really didn't “matter” you wouldn't have made any pictures at all!

# If it matters that much that you have also posted a picture of your "black jesus", what is the goal of your own racist exercise?

# What has your black jesus done for YOU?

peace from Naija
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nE68_ysPZ_0&mode=related&search=
more pics--> https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-4050.32.html#msg1141387

Hello all! I've read just about every post on this subject. It is interesting that the majority of the posts that I have read have been pretty limited in the knowledge of Jehovah's Witnesses (including the ones posted by those of you that are currently studying).  I was born and raised as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I was baptized at the age of 13. Many things came to the fore that lead to my decision to leave (disassociate myself) when I was 23 years old. I was married and had one child at the time.

Now that there is someone on this forum that truly LIVED the life as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, let's get the facts cleared up about many of the misconceptions that I have read on this forum.

On of the FIRST things I must clear up, even though I have left and disagree with most of the teachings of the Wathchtower Bible and Tract Society, is this strange idea from a certain poster here that the majority of Jehovah's Witnesses are white. This is the most rediculous and non-important claim that I have ever heard.  I am caucasion myself, however the congregations that I was a part of were a majority of black desent. I have traveled all over the US. to over 500 conventions over time and have not seen that the majority are of any specific race. Not only that, it's pointless to make being one of Jehovah's Witnesses a racial 'thing'.

Now that this is out of the way. Bring on the questions! I walked the walk and talked the talk! I was a Ministerial Servant and Full Time Pioneer (minister), my father was an elder, and I was a major interpreter for the deaf used by the Society at the assemblies and conventions.

Now let's begin the real discussion.

Lou Everett

Still no answer.?Why in all Jehovah's Witnesses Publication,why aren't any of the prophets, prophetesses, princes, princesses, priests, Adam and Eve, Jesus, or pharaohs of a different race than Caucasian?

I think Christ is not a religious thing neither is Christ a Book thing. I dont think you understand relationship between what you are saying as considered what is written in the Bible you claim you know.

Do you know what is Only True?
That is exactly what Rutherford (Who took over from Russel) said when he assumed into the office making him to produce copies of Golden Age(Awake) and distribute round the world telling people every other religion is tool of eveil.

I think by your post you are refreshing my mind to that. I wouldnt know where you get power to call other religions tool of eveil and urs is only true religion if God have not said so.