billyG: Religion is evil! Religion is the opium of the gullible people.It is the Torch of the Blind! No religion can lead you to your long-fore destination!Only the TRUTH and unless you can sieve  the (Wheat) TRUTH from the chaffs(false teaching,false doctrines,dogma,distortions) you are lost(Doomed) forever.

not all religions are evil. What is evil about religion is hypocrisy and deception, a xteristic of WTTS which i strongly detest.

Yooguyz: @JMAN05
I guess you're using prov 4:18 to justify your answer above and this
““The path of the righteous ones
is like the bright light that is
getting lighter and lighter until
the day is firmly established,”
states Proverbs 4:18. Yes, Jesus’
leadership is progressive, not
stagnant. Another way to
cooperate with Christ’s
“brothers” is to have a positive
attitude toward any refinements
in our understanding of
Scriptural truths as published by
“the faithful and discreet slave.””
Watchtower 2011 May 15 p.27
“Regarding progressive spiritual
enlightenment, Proverbs 4:18
has proved true. It says: “The
path of the righteous ones is like
the bright light that is getting
lighter and lighter until the day is
firmly established.” How thankful
we are for the progressive
spiritual enlightenment we have
experienced!” Watchtower 2001
Jan 15 p.18
“IT IS proof of divine wisdom
that, in keeping with Proverbs
4:18, the revealing of spiritual
truths has taken place gradually
by means of flashes of light. In
the preceding article, we saw
how this text was fulfilled in
apostolic times. If the large body
of Scriptural truth had been
revealed all at once, it would have
been both blinding and
confusing—much like the effect
of coming out of a dark cave into
brilliant sunlight. Moreover,
gradually revealed truth
strengthens the faith of
Christians in a continuous way. It
makes ever brighter their hope
and ever clearer the pathway
they are to tread.” Watchtower
1995 May 15 p.15
right?
Now ask yourself these questions
* what is the intended meaning of prov 4:18

what is the meaning of path, and what is the meaning of brighter?

why should should an inspired person have a wrong understanding at times and an unspired person should have less?

* is WT doctrine getting brighter or changing?

were the understanding of those disciples getting brighter or changing?

*would Jehovah direct a religion to promote falsehood?

name the falsehood they promote and give scriptural proof on why they are false?

The concept of brighter light that you're talking about doesn't apply to WT history as doctrine has not refined, but rather it changed.

when something gets brighter, are their changes in the brightness?

however what you said above also applies to inspired persons of bible times.

Yooguyz:
not all religions are evil. What is evil about religion is hypocrisy and deception, a xteristic of WTTS which i strongly detest.

what I hate is someone championing gay life as a profess xtian.

JMAN05:

what I hate is someone championing gay life as a profess xtian.

I NEVER CHAMPIONED GAY LIFESTYLE. Don't mix things up, it's one thing to be attracted to the same sex and accept it, it's another thing, to act on these unclean desires.
If you want to discuss sexuality or you have any questions about it, open a new thread on that, and don't derial this one.

@JMAN05,
Give me two scriptural examples of how Jesus' disciples' light got "brighter". Meanwhile i'll get back to your questions. Lemme do some research

@JMAN05,
Examples of "falsehoods" that have been discarded by jw's
It was
not increasing light that dictated:
In the 1950's that Jesus was no
longer to be worshipped; it was
a fundamental teaching that was
(or currently is) wrong
Failed date prophecies
Pyramids were prophetic of
1914
Superior authorities were
Goverments - God - Governments
Numerous changes to the
meaning of the generation
These were not clarifications -
these were wrong teachings.
How many wrong teachings did
God allow to become part of the
Bible canon? Now compare that
with how many wrong teachings
are contained within the
Watchtower over less then 150
years.

Ongoing reversal of
doctrine can only indicate God is
not involved in these new flashes
of light that later turn out to be
falsehoods. Yet the Watchtower
leadership claim these changes
are from Jehovah, not to be
questioned.
“How do you react when
Jehovah, the Source of spiritual
enlightenment, sheds light on
“the deep things of God” found
in the Bible? (1 Cor. 2:10-13) We
have an excellent example in the
apostle Peter’s reaction when
Jesus told His listeners the words
of today’s text. Taking those
words literally, many disciples
said: “This speech is shocking;
who can listen to it?” They “went
off to the things behind.” But
Peter said: “Lord, whom shall we
go away to? You have sayings of
everlasting life.” (John 6:60, 66,
68) Peter relied on God for
spiritual enlightenment. When
spiritual light on some matter
gets brighter, do you try to
understand the underlying
Scriptural reasons for the
adjustment? (Prov. 4:18)”
Examining the Scriptures Daily
2013 p.17
“Of course, such development of
understanding, involving
“tacking” as it were, has often
served as a test of loyalty for
those associated with the
“faithful and discreet slave.”
However, progress is being made
continually toward fuller
appreciation of the “good news”
and all that it means. It has been
the experience of those who stay
close to God’s organization that
questions and things hard to
understand are always cleared
up with the passing of time. And
as the light shines forth ever
more clearly, how heartwarming
and satisfying the way proves to
be!” Watchtower 1981 Dec 1
p.31
When is it truth?
This concept is applicable to any
Christian religion similar to the
Witnesses, such as
Christadelphians and Church of
God. Both of these have a
doctrinal structure almost
identical to Jehovah's Witnesses.
It has equal application to
Seventh-day Adventists, who
started concurrently with the
Witnesses from the same basic
teachings of Miller. Seventh-day
Adventists preach and grow at
the same rate. A person raised in
any of these religions is equally
convinced that the "light getting
brighter" will clarify things
wrong with their religion.
The Church of God uses the same
"new light" reasoning, as shown
in an experience of a member at
ex-sda.com (May 2 2006):
"Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong still
took what seemed to me a less
than candid approach. He called
our Divorce & Remarriage
change "new light," "new truth"
which God has (finally) shown us.
In other words, he subtly blamed
our doctrinal error on God."
So do Mormons. In an experience
of a Mormon that converted to
being a Jehovah's Witness, it is
ironic that one of his reasons
was:
"I dug deeper into the teachings
of my faith and also consulted
with responsible Mormon Church
leaders. I was told that the
answers to my questions
involved mysteries that one day
would be solved as the light
became brighter." Watchtower
2013 Feb 1 p.9

Yooguyz:
I NEVER CHAMPIONED GAY LIFESTYLE. Don't mix things up, it's one thing to be attracted to the same sex and accept it, it's another thing, to act on these unclean desires.
If you want to discuss sexuality or you have any questions about it, open a new thread on that, and don't derial this one.

so it is unclean and you support and live by it as a xtian?

Yooguyz: @JMAN05,
Give me two scriptural examples of how Jesus' disciples' light got "brighter". Meanwhile i'll get back to your questions. Lemme do some research

they though that the kingdom was coming at the time of Jesus resurrection. (acts1:6)

Peter rejected his vision concerning the gentiles as something defiled? acts 10:9-16. his spiritual light was made clearer. acts 10:34

Many among the anointed xtians thought that circumcision was still in operation. acts 15:1-5

Apolos knowledge was not bright in baptismal issue but was helped. acts 18:25-26.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE7sxfQOiE4&gl=US&hl=en-GB&guid=&client=mv-google

http://m.youtube.com/watch?rl=yes&v=hQXrh3P3Dp4&feature=related&client=mv-google&guid=&hl=en-GB&gl=US

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=0tdsEPeDqYE&rl=yes&client=mv-google&gl=US&guid=&hl=en-GB

WATCH IT ALL

Examples of "falsehoods" that have
been discarded by jw's
It was
not increasing light that dictated.

I repeat my question above:

when something gets brighter, are
their changes in the brightness?

what did apolos do to his former knowledge? improved it, shey?

when Peter said, CERTAINLY, I PERCEIVE that God is not partial. what did Peter now did to his former view of the gentiles? discard, change or improve?

when a light gets brighter, are their some changes in your vision?

those who believe in the law, what did they do to that former believe after the meeting at acts 15?

all these have a miraculous gift with them and they accepted changes in their former view. how much more so a person who is not inspired and who has no miraculous gift.

[quote] Ongoing reversal of
doctrine can only indicate God is
not involved in these new flashes
of light that later turn out to be
falsehoods.

He is just like He was in the past. only if you accept that scriptural truths come gradually in sync with prov. 4:18 can you make sense.

God made some truth come to light as time pass. Dan. 12:4

“And as for you, O Daniel, make
secret the words and seal up the book, +
until the time of [the] end. * + Many will
rove about, and the [true] knowledge *
will become abundant.”

I only accept it when people scripturally prove the current believe of the witnesses wrong, not going back to when they have humbly admitted their mistakes.

I tell you that this method makes their teaching formidable as they get closer to the "day it is firmly established."

This is among the qualities that made me love the GB when I was in the church. Do you think its easy to admit a mistake? it is even hard for nairalander to admit he was wrong, not to talk of someone who occupy a prominent position.

Examples of "falsehoods" that have
been discarded by jw's
It was
not increasing light that dictated.

I repeat my question above:

when something gets brighter, are
their changes in the brightness?

what did apolos do to his former knowledge? improved it, shey?

when Peter said, CERTAINLY, I PERCEIVE that God is not partial. what did Peter now did to his former view of the gentiles? discard, change or improve?

when a light gets brighter, are their some changes in your vision?

those who believe in the law, what did they do to that former believe after the meeting at acts 15?

all these have a miraculous gift with them and they accepted changes in their former view. how much more so a person who is not inspired and who has no miraculous gift.

Ongoing reversal of
doctrine can only indicate God is
not involved in these new flashes
of light that later turn out to be
falsehoods.

He is just like He was in the past. only if you accept that scriptural truths come gradually in sync with prov. 4:18 can you make sense.

God made some truth come to light as time pass. Dan. 12:4

“And as for you, O Daniel, make
secret the words and seal up the book, +
until the time of [the] end. * + Many will
rove about, and the [true] knowledge *
will become abundant.”

I only accept it when people scripturally prove the current believe of the witnesses wrong, not going back to when they have humbly admitted their mistakes.

I tell you that this method makes their teaching formidable as they get closer to the "day it is firmly established."

This is among the qualities that made me love the GB when I was in the church. Do you think its easy to admit a mistake? it is even hard for nairalander to admit he was wrong, not to talk of someone who occupy a prominent position.

Tofunmi Abe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BE7sxfQOiE4&gl=US&hl=en-GB&guid=&client=mv-google

http://m.youtube.com/watch?rl=yes&v=hQXrh3P3Dp4&feature=related&client=mv-google&guid=&hl=en-GB&gl=US

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=0tdsEPeDqYE&rl=yes&client=mv-google&gl=US&guid=&hl=en-GB

WATCH IT ALL

My guy, I know I read much about the witnesses online, which i have gotten good answers to, but I know that some still remains.

however, I appreciate it when you make those things in the video you own let me reply you. write them out. until you do that!

say "you people believe this or that, but the bible at so so so said this which contradicts it". that is a reasoning I like. that was how the witnesses were proving some of my believes in the church wrong at that time.

Anything beyond that is self centeredness and unjust criticism. be constructive. You have a bible, I have a bible. the message is not mine, neither is it yours, USE GOD'S WORD TO PROVE THEM WRONG!

I dont believe they have it all, though I cant bring up a good arguement to prove any of their teaching wrong, but they have greater greater percentage of truth compared to others. however, they too opine that their knowledge comes progressively.

And if you watch most of my comments, you will observe that I dont present what I believe as if "it is my church's doctrine", I am convinced that this is the message from the bible.

I bet yhu were neva a witness

Repdalton: I bet yhu were neva a witness

I assume this is directed to me. am I right? if so, your prove.

@JMAN05
"If we were following a man
undoubtedly it would be
different with us; undoubtedly
one human idea would
contradict another and that
which was light one or two or
six years ago would be regarded
as darkness now;… But with God
there is no variableness, neither
shadow of turning, and so it is
with truth; any knowledge or
light coming from God must be
like its author. A new view of
truth NEVER can CONTRADICT a
former truth. "New Light" NEVER
extinguishes older "light" but
adds to it…" Zion's Watch Tower
1881 Feb pp.3,188
now watch and see below how a former "truth" contradicts a new "truth"

SUPERIOR AUTHORITIES
Up to 1929
“Evil as these Gentile
governments have been, they
were permitted or “ordained of
God” for a wise purpose. (Rom.
13:1)” Studies In the Scriptures
Series I - The Divine Plan of the
Ages p.250
1969- 1962
“The Superior
Authorities are the Most
High God Jehovah and
his exalted Son Jesus
Christ.” This Means
Everlasting Life (1950)
p.197
1962 till now
“The Expression “superior
authorities” means the
political governments or
authorities.” Life everlasting
in Freedom of the Sons of
God (1966) p.189

JMAN05:

so it is unclean and you support and live by it as a xtian?

quote me in any way i said i LIVE BY or SUPPORT the gaylifestyle, either expressly or implied.
Am waiting for your answer

@JMAN05
yes peter discarded view of the gentiles, but he never reverted back to his former view. Now compare that with WT back and forth doctrine on superior authorities i showed you above

@JMAN05,
the GB admits to mistakes? Seriously?
After their secret link to the UN was uncovered by John bates, why did they come up with the silly excuse of library access even when there was an overwhelming body of evidence to prove otherwise. Didn't doesn't smell humility, its smells DECEPTION, MANIPULATION. Dude open your eyes and see.

Yooguyz:
quote me in any way i said i LIVE BY or SUPPORT the gaylifestyle, either expressly or implied.
Am waiting for your answer

What the meaning of your post to which you gave your wholehearted support to a post made in it by someone.

" Re: U.S. Pastor Supports Jason
Collins Decision To Come Out As
Gay by Yooguyz : 1:48pm On Sep 10
1000 000 likes for the above ".

Yooguyz: @JMAN05,
the GB admits to mistakes? Seriously?
After their secret link to the UN was uncovered by John bates, why did they come up with the silly excuse of library access even when there was an overwhelming body of evidence to prove otherwise. Didn't doesn't smell humility, its smells DECEPTION, MANIPULATION. Dude open your eyes and see.

Well I also have my prove that their affiliation was to having access to the library from which they prepare our publications.

They get information from verious areas, even libraries owned by Catholic. But is for reference purposes, to get accurate info not guesswork. never are they supporting this organisations.

Some bible writers may have consulted secular books before penning their canon.

Yooguyz: @JMAN05,
the GB admits to mistakes? Seriously?
After their secret link to the UN was uncovered by John bates, why did they come up with the silly excuse of library access even when there was an overwhelming body of evidence to prove otherwise. Didn't doesn't smell humility, its smells DECEPTION, MANIPULATION. Dude open your eyes and see.

Well I also have my prove that their affiliation was to having access to the library from which they prepare our publications.

They get information from verious areas, even libraries owned by Catholic. But is for reference purposes, to get accurate info not guesswork. never are they supporting this organisations. until you present your prove.

Some bible writers may have consulted secular books before penning their canon.

JMAN05:

What the meaning of your post to which you gave your wholehearted support to a post made in it by someone.

" Re: U.S. Pastor Supports Jason
Collins Decision To Come Out As
Gay by Yooguyz : 1:48pm On Sep 10
1000 000 likes for the above ".

Chai, see as people they fail Jamb, i asked you to quote me, you were quoting someone else, ok quote Hezrons post that made me say the above, you didn't.
I think you are just looking for a desperate means to derial the thread, by witholding information, posting misleading comments about me. After all if i made any comment that supports GAY LIFESTYLE why didn't you quote me?

JMAN05:

Well I also have my prove that their affiliation was to having access to the library from which they prepare our publications.

They get information from verious areas, even libraries owned by Catholic. But is for reference purposes, to get accurate info not guesswork. never are they supporting this organisations. until you present your prove.

Some bible writers may have consulted secular books before penning their canon.

are you kidding me? Do you know that Access information provided by the UN library's system shows that a person does not need to be an "associate" NGO to obtain all information from the UN library ( check the UN website ). The 1994 and 1999-2000 DPI directories of all NGO's associated with the UN shows the name and address along with the names

W.L.Barry( a former Gb member), Ciro Aulicino and Robert Johnson. The Barry name links the approval for the partnership with the UN at the highest levels in WTTS. # i have about 6 documents in my phone to prove the above, say the word and i'll post them#

It seems like the WTS are ignoring the fact that "associate" NGO's must disseminate UN propaganda to their members and regularly report back to the UN samples of their activities in the annual reports. Infact in the 1st two years of being an "associate" they proved their loyalty to the UN, by devoting a portion of their publications to the beast's agenda. # i have the documents in my phone #

COMING TO KNOW JEHOVAH IS THE MOST BEAUTIFUL THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED TO ME, TNK U JEHOVAH FOR SHOWN ME D WAY TO LIFE.... TANK U FOR UR SPIRITED DIRECTED ORGANIZATION....THANK YOU FOR OUR WHOLE ASSOCIATION OF BROTHERS...........EVER LOYAL.....PROUDLY JEHOVAH WITNESSES!

@JMAN05,
o boy! Where you go na, abi you don run?

Yooguyz: @JMAN05,
o boy! Where you go na, abi you don run?

Run? i dont know whether I was blocked or something. I couldnt access the compose area since you made your first post above. the information said that i should try in few hours. but even more than 24 hours i couldnt access it.

Now to your point:

a) they are not incorporated in the UN system. which is a prove of their intention, namely to get access to info for the magazines.

b) being a member means that you have to support UN's target. which is the reason I personally think they erred.

c) their being a member didnt make them to change their position to the effect that UN is still the beast. which shows that they never reneged on the truth.

Now, they condenmed the UN as the beast and never changed their position. this beast is what they went to support. to this extent if you say they were wrong, you are correct. however, their mistake was corrected by others which shouldnt be. But their humble withdrawal from it is an indication that they accepted a reproved and changed. this is humility to me.

On the area of saying that they dont accept their mistakes, my brother, the sun bears them witness that they openly acknowlegde many mistakes they made in theology. if you say its a lie, YOU ARE PURELY INSINCERE. and this is the point I was making above.

Again, you ve not proved their current teaching wrong, which is the area that I am interested in. that someone taught one thing and supported what he spoke against indirectly is bad, however, that does not mean that their teaching on that thing is wrong (until u prove it wrong).

Sen Danny: COMING TO KNOW JEHOVAH IS THE MOST BEAUTIFUL THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED TO ME, TNK U JEHOVAH FOR SHOWN ME D WAY TO LIFE.... TANK U FOR UR SPIRITED DIRECTED ORGANIZATION....THANK YOU FOR OUR WHOLE ASSOCIATION OF BROTHERS...........EVER LOYAL.....PROUDLY JEHOVAH WITNESSES!

My bro this is the truth. dont shake.