Op, u r doin a gud job, well done! I really appreciate your indept knowledge abt JWS.  On d issue of trinity, can anyone answer  'Yes or No' Can a son be egaul to his father? can't elaborate cos am typin tru phone, til i get there tomoro.

Yes am one of JWS

@lastpage
I must confess this is one great thread. It's as hilarious as it's informative.

lastpage:
Can you relate with an earlier post l "copied" (with permission  ) from another J.W poster on his explanation on the "Use of blood" by Christians?
I find the explanation very rational, from a purely religious point of view but another Poster now threw spanners in the works by implying that "if it is in the course of a greater and common good, some religious obligations can be "bent" around, just like Christ "bent around" the issue of Sabbath Day, in the Bible.
What is your take on that?

Like you, one tries not to be too assertive in religious matters. I prefer to read, learn and, wherever really necessary, try to point out objective errors I find. On your question above, find here where I have done just that in the other thread.

I agree with what you say about trousers. Like most religions, the JW is a patriarchy. It is the Nigerian church elders who are men who tell the women it is wrong to wear trousers.

Pause a while and stop discussing Doctrines.Look at ur life now,r u an unrepentant fornicator?R u dishonest n corrupt n see nothing wrong wit ur attitude?Do u think u r doing ur best to serve God n do his will?Being a christian mean u r chrislike,but wud christ do the things u do?Pls u shud all ask urself dis questions.
I was like u,a church goer who was well respected by my pastor even tho i was a wicked man because i donate generously.From d gud example of a Jehovah's Witness(God bless him),my life was totally transformed.Am a gud person now,who tries to live by Bibles standards at all times.My family became joyous,bt hated d idea of me being a witness,n dis is wat changed my life 4 beta.Dis made me truly believe that i av found d truth.Cos Jesus said"since they hated me,they wud hate u also.John 15:19
I AM PROUD TO BE A JEHOVAH'S WITNESS.Behold my mum is attending to now.
Pause a while and stop discussing Doctrines.Look at ur life now,r u an unrepentant fornicator?R u dishonest n corrupt n see nothing wrong wit ur attitude?Do u think u r doing ur best to serve God n do his will?Being a christian mean u r chrislike,but wud christ do the things u do?Pls u shud all ask urself dis questions.
I was like u,a church goer who was well respected by my pastor even tho i was a wicked man because i donate generously.From d gud example of a Jehovah's Witness(God bless him),my life was totally transformed.Am a gud person now,who tries to live by Bibles standards at all times.My family became joyous,bt hated d idea of me being a witness,n dis is wat changed my life 4 beta.Dis made me truly believe that i av found d truth.Cos Jesus said"since they hated me,they wud hate u also.John 15:19
I AM PROUD TO BE A JEHOVAH'S WITNESS.Behold my mum is attending to now.

I have two of them where l work, they are P.O's wives, but have tagged me:
- Iya Jesu as if they don't believe in Him.

They usually condemn anything l do spiritually, they like me to pay "anything" to get their Awake/Watchtower,

but can NEVER ask me for any of my Church's bulletins on my table not to talk of a book!

On Face Book, they classify their friends:

Witnesses and Non-witnesses

In fact, they must be in a cult/secret society to behave the way the do!

If you want to pursue them out of wherever you are or whenever they come to preach to you; just tell them "Shall we pray?" They will never pray with you in PUBLIC!

Even at our meetings in the office, ask them to pray, they won't answer you, and when someone is asked to DO

THAT THEY DON'T DO IN PUBLIC, they won't say Amen!

Hi Last page:

Without sounding all official, I will like to commend your writing this post. I am very wary of commenting on Nairaland because I find the comments too hostile However I have found this comments very mature. To clear the air I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I feel like I should take a bit more time to really answer some of the questions here but I don't really have the luxury of time.

Just a bit of background to myself: I came to know about the Jehovah's Witness faith from my grand parents. My mum didn't really take to it and my father was never one of JW's. They did allow us to go whilst we were younger to the meetings and to have a Bible Study with them. Like you say from the age of 6 I could really speak up about my faith and my forays into professional public speaking began from there. However as I grew up I found quite a number of things confusing and to cut a long story short at about 20 years of age I had to do some thorough research into the subject of religion as a whole. During this time I had become an inactive witness(about 3 years). I really took my time to study their faiths objectively and resolved afterwards to be a dedicated and committed witness.

One subject I found very troubling was the issue of the 144,000. I couldn't get this for a while but it didn't stop me from becoming a baptized witness because I felt that even Jesus disciples didn't always understand everything Jesus said and did but still followed him. In some cases they only understood matters clearly after Jesus left the earth.

One illustration that has helped me with the issue of the 144,000 is that of today's government. We have 1 president and a number of Ministers and advisers. Not all Nigerians can be in the Government and not all need to be. What is the criteria for selection? Well a number of factors not necessarily that they are the best in that particular field. With a responsible government we trust the judgement of it's helmsman. God has done a similar thing in first appointing his son as King of the Kingdom. To rule with him are humans who have been bought from the earth to rule with him as kings. Their varied experiences and varied geographical location and different personality will come to bear in Jesus Government. Take note that the scriptures in Revelation 5 says that this people have been bought from the earth to rule as kings and priests. Note though that your belief in this arrangement is dependent on your first believing that humans will inherit the earth forever.

I know I have really not done justice to this because of time and I have definitely not included specific scriptures because I don't have a bible with me here. Feel free to ask any specific questions and I should be able to answer them better in the future.

Cheers,

K

JW is a cult pure and simple - they have a work based religion. In other words it is not based on faith (that is they rely on there works rather than grace - Jesus's justification of believers thru confidence in his atonement on the cross or tree if your a JW ;-)  )

The founder of JW was Charles Taze Russell  - he was a heretic and a Freemason as was Joseph Smith the founder of Jesus Later Day Saints.  In fact Charles Taze Russell  was a member of the Knights Templer a demonic occultist organization and the precursor of Freemasonary.

Look at his grave site and you will see Freemasonary symbolism

By the way Knights Templer where responsible for the occultist organisation called Freemasonary

As some will know this organization is a very dangerous group of individuals

They are not Christian but a cult whereas Charles Taze Russel was an occultist


burial site link http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=5591

My best friend a few years back is a J.W,  and for more dan 4 years she never tried forcing her religion down my throat ( Ist J.W I'v seen wit such an attitude    BTW am an Anglican) I initially tot she may nt b dat "spiritual" until I went 2 her house on a weekend ( she lived with her parents back den ) & meet her conducting a bible study & I was pretty surprised . Let me point out dat she was nt perfect & didnt claim 2 b ( who is sef? ) & I loved her 4 dat ( very candid babe & unassuming ) unlike some J.Ws I'v met who has dis hoiler dan thou look. Oda dan dat, I DO luv dia AWAKE mag very much, their simplistic live style & brother hood attitude BT I dnt agree with some of dia doctrines.
My take is this - to each is own as long as u r worshiping God in spirit & n truth.

pelezico:

JW is a cult pure and simple

As 4 whether it is a cult? Now dat is a very heavy word. I dont think u reali know d meaning of cultism. Dat s.one has a different view from wat u believe n does nt mean he/she is a cultist

Mr. Pelezico,
You must be a liar, stop condeming CT RUSSEL.HE WAS HEVER A FREEMASOON, he only used their name in one of his speech as a friend but he was never a member. READ THE INFO BELOW. PLEASE READ TO DETAIL AND JUDGE.

http://www.cephasministry.com/jw_was_russell_a_mason.html

Was Charles Taze Russell a Mason?

An examination of some of the publications of Charles T. Russell, the founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses, would indicate that he had ties with the Masons. He used Masonic symbols. The Watchtower drawing that graced early publications right up to a couple of decades ago was pure Masonic. Russell was buried under a cross and a crown, again Masonic. Other Masonic symbols were used frequently on his publications.
We keep getting speculative articles in our mail and e-mail indicating that Russell was a Mason. Missing is the proof - where are the records of this membership if he indeed was one?
Over the past twenty-two years we have resisted jumping on the "Masonic Russell" bandwagon, awaiting something definite. Well, we feel we have finally found something which should settle the issue once and for all.
We are indebted to the extensive information found on Randall Watters website (www.freeminds.org) which included a Special 1913 Convention Report of the Internal Bible Students. Under the subject of "The Temple of Gods" is a discourse by Pastor Russell reported verbatim on pages 120-127. Russell's own comments on this very speculation once and for all. Was he a Mason?
It is evident he was familiar with the Masons. In the beginning of the discourse he point out how he is "more" than many of the groups, Masons included. These first set of quotes are all found on page 120.
"Do our Masonic friends understand something about the Temple, and being Knights Templars and so on? We more." He goes on to say that Masons and other have, "that little bit of truth".
Russell admits ", we remember we had very similar ideas, and not very long ago; but, without finding any fault with anybody, we are glad that we are coming to see a more reasonable and harmonious way, "
He next moves on to points where he agrees with the Masons. A very careful reading is needed here, because if one or two sentences are taken out of context it would indeed appear that Russell was a Mason. Notice that he refers to Mason as "them" and "they", excluding himself and the brethren.
"I am very glad to have this particular opportunity of saying a word about some of the things in which we agree with our Masonic friends, because we are speaking in a building dedicated to Masonry and we also are Masons. I am a Free Mason. I am a free and accepted Mason, if I may carry the matter to its full length, because that is what our Masonic brethren like to tell us, that they are free and accepted Masons. That is their style of putting it. Now I am a free and accepted Mason. I trust we all are. But not after the style of our Masonic brethren. We have no quarrel with them. I am not going to say a word against Masons, and I can appreciate that there are certain very precious truths that are held in part by our Masonic friends. I have talked to them at times, and they have said, How do you know about all these things? We thought nobody knew anything about these things except those who had access to our highest logic."
So, Russell did say "Now I am a free and accepted Mason" but, in context it is obvious he was not, because he included all his brethren in the faith as being "Masons" as well. He also said they were all Masons, but "not after the style of our Masonic brethren."
Russell went on to place himself above the Masons because he felt he had more "secrets" than they did, his coming from the Lord himself!
"I said that I had been in conference with the Great Master Workman, the Lord himself, and I have secret information through the Holy Spirit and guidance in respect to what the Bible says, and that contains all the truth, I believe on every subject. And so if we talk to our Masonic friends about the Temple and its meaning, and about being good Masons, and about the Great Pyramid, which is the very emblem they use, and what the Great Pyramid signifies, our Masonic friends are astonished, We are going to discuss free and accepted Masonry, the Bible Masonry, my dear friends."
So, it is evident that while Russell tells all listeners to this discourse that he and they are all "Masons", it is obvious that he has his own meaning for the term, which he calls "Bible Masonry". As we go on, it is evident he feels he has transcended masonry's secrets and added a few of his own. [ 1913 Convention Report]
By page 121, which we will now consider, he parts company with Masonic theology, which does not recognize Jesus Christ as their head. Russell says, ", for you know the Head of the Pyramid is a perfect pyramid itself, and all the stones under that simply come into line with the top stone; and that top stone is what the Bible declares Jesus is - the chief corner-stone."
I hate to point out obvious errors in construction, but a "cornerstone" is the foundation of the building, not the peak stone at the top! Our faith rests on the chief cornerstone Jesus Christ, He doesn't sit attop our faith (shaped like a pyramid)!
Russell mixes up the Temple with the Pyramid theology he held, and then compares his organization's temple to the Masonic one.
"The Temple will not be completed until every living stone is there. And then what? The next thing will be that which our Masonic friends make so much of, and which we make so much of namely: the glorification of the temple. That is a grand thing in Masonry. They picture how Solomon the wise, the type of Jesus - offered the sacrifice, and how God accepted it, and the glory of the Lord came into the Temple. Just so our Temple, the Church in glory, will not be the Temple of God until the Heavenly Father himself shall have recognized it." [Also found on much early WT material sun god Ra on Queens, NY Assemby Hall ]
Russell later went on to claim that Jehovah God did indeed recognize himself and himself his little band of followers as the true Temple, and they alone, in all the earth were pleasing to the Father. How is this possible when he was steeped in pyramidology and Masonic "sec-rets" which he accepted? It boggles the mind to imagine God choosing one steeped in occult and pagan doctrines.
Russell now goes on to compare the heavenly reign of himself and his followers, the "Royal Priesthood" (who he says will be divine) to the Knights Templar of the Masonic Templar of the Masonic Lodge! (The order with the most occult symbols). ", A thousand years during which these Knights Templar are to scatter blessings to all the families of the earth."
Heresy aside, he just loved to use Masonic terms and show how he and his followers were superior "Masons", superior "Knights Templar". He then offers full freedom of choice to his followers in these words, ", If you feel that you want to become a member of the Free and Accepted Order of Masonry, and do not feel free and Masonic enough as a follower of Christ, God bless you, use your own judgment; that is yours to decide not mine. But now I am talking about this great order of masonry of which Jesus is the Grand Master. This Order is to be entered in a peculiar way. There are certain conditions - the low gate, the narrow way, the difficult path".
Now comes his most telling statement on the subject of whether or not he was a Mason.
"Although I have never been a Mason, I have heard that in Masonry they have something which very closely illustrates all of this".
So, by Russell's own words, minus the "double-speak" and the parallels he draws all through this discourse, he plainly says he has never been a Mason.

J.W? Those guys that don't want to go to heaven? Well, off i go preparing to go to Heaven.

[center]JEHOVAH WITNESSES’ OMISSIONS[/center]

Jehovah witnesses’s Holy Bible named New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures is incomplete. Jehovah Witnesses know that if they add the verses below to their Holy Bible, the verses below will expose their false belief or doctrine.

I sorry them in other hand. This is what God says about such action. "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book."

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life and out of the Holy City, and from the things, which are written in this book. (Revelation 22:18-19)

1. Matthew 17:21

2. Matthew 18:11

3. Matthew 23:14

4. Mark 7:16

5. Mark 9:44

6. Mark 9:46

7. Mark 11:26

8. Mark 15:28

9. Luke 23:17

10. John 5:4

11. Act 24:7

12. Acts 28:29

13. Acts 8:37

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming them-selves into the apostle of Christ.
And no marvel for satan himself is transformed unto an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministries also transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
(2 Corinthians 11:13-15)

I really need to thank everyone who has contributed so far!
I am sure l am not the only one learning "new things" here.

I also want to check-out some assertions here, read the "links" given by both sides so l can come to an informed "position", going forward.

If anyone thinks he knows it all, he fools himself and that is why "it is very key that people who defer on certain issues, have an opportunity to sit down and discuss their differences, in a humble and matured manner, so that differences can be minimized while similarities can be amplified"!

Now, this issue of "masonry, Pyramid and Templar" is "new" on me as it regards to "Christians and J.W's". Cant comment on it now.

Let me thank PwOnder, Ibukun Obi, klear, Kenoye, Pelezico, aboqui, Noghayin03, Beync, Ojuumiii, Cloud7, Psuh4naija and begwong, for your contributions.

Its not about "thrashing" a group of Christians or Muslims, its about understanding each other more: You explain your side, l explain my side!

Let me also thank everyone that have made their "religious affiliation" known.

I would like to "stand aside" a little while those who are experts (on the J.W side) explain the misconceptions/misgivings people have about the group.
Mind you, l cannot repeat too often that l am not a J.W (no pun intended) and l dont purport to know much about them or speak for them but l have rubbed shoulders with them a lot, in various capacities that l know just about "a little" about them but then, if its not an Eagle, it cannot soar like an Eagle"!
I also wonder, that they dont participate in "conflict/war or any kind", how would an "utopian society" be, if it were fully made up of J.W's? No Libya, No Iraq, No Somalia, No Kosovo, No Cold war, No Afghanistan, No Boko haram or OPC or MEND, (closer home), e.t.c

Just "arguments and counter arguments" and its sorted? Hmmmm.,.,.,.,.,.

Cheers everyone.


BTW: I have never met a J.W. who is "noisy and puffy about worldly things", one who is generally uncouth as they tend to maintain decorum and that itself is evident from the few that have contributed on this thread, except the one who made the quote below!
You will agree that other Christians and Muslims who have contributed here-in are also worthy of emulation.

@mxxpunkxx

Who baptized you? As much as I am gentlemanly;  I can be wild.
I am one, and I bet your car is not as flashy as mine; dat's if u even have a car. I dont wanna be too personal lest am called a fanatic.
Religion should be a force for good! Its your life to live and not your parents. I got baptized at age 9. Dont say it was too young to understand d teachings of spirituality cos i was in high school and i could solve complex mathematics.

To be honest, in all  my years on earth (and l currently have two siblings who are full time J.W's, one of them is even an Elder!) l have NEVER met a J.W that sounds like that! Some mothers do have them? Naaah.
Anyway, will ignore him and keep keeping this discourse as civil, mature and informative as can be!

frustrating doctrines

It was yesterday I had a stop on this thrend, and I spent the whole day taking a wholistic reading of it. The fact is am impressed. @lastpage I must say you did a great job.
My father was an Anglican before he later became a JW so I was born around the christian congregation and later decided to make a decision to make the christian congregation my place of abode. So am proud to be a JW. One aspect I would like to contribute is the aspect of baptism which was earlier raised up there in this thrend. Why do you have to get baptized and dedicate yourself to Jehovah before becoming a valid servant of God?
It is intresting that Jesus set the patern for this right practice (mat 3:16) from this word, it is obvious that Jesus decision to do his father's will was openly symbolized by baptism. It was after he came out of the water that Jehovah's spirit came upon him and Jehovah said those words to the hearing of John.
Note that Jesus went to a dedicated servant of God to have the baptism performed not to the sadducees or pharisees, likewise today (mat 28:35-39) baptism is done after the individual's dedication and perform by persons that also already have been baptized. The case of the ethiopian eunuch and Philip is a classic example (acts 8:35-39).
Someone might say 'I have been baptized and dedicated before in my church' but the question is to what teaching or principle was he dedicated? If such one was sprinkled as an infant or @ any other age, could such one dedicate himself to God?, my own answer here is NO. why because sprinkling is not the spiritually proper type of baptism (refer to the patern of Jesus and philip above) a person has to be completely immersed in water. Also many of the churches to which they were formally baptized believe and teach the 'blessed trinity' which denies the Bible teaching of Jehovah's eternal supremacy and his son's (Jesus) being always obedient, subordinate and unequal to his father. And also the the immortality of the soul, contrary to the Bible teaching of the manner in which humans are created.
Therefore both dedication and water baptism acceptable to the true God will fully harmonize with the terms of his requirements written in his word the Bible; and every willing learner will eagerly conform to such righteous requirements.
I might stop there for now, but will also like to reiterate the fact that baptism is not the remover of sin but for repentance over sin (1cor 6:9-11)and determination to use our life in the divine will as set forth in the Sciptures. We are free moral agents with freedom to choose our course of life but such freedom comes with accountabilities and responsibilities.( Deut 30:15-17)
I greet you all baptism which was earlier raised up there in this thrend. Why do you have to get baptized and dedicate yourself to Jehovah before becoming a valid servant of God?
It is intresting that Jesus set the patern for this right practice (mat 3:16) from this word, it is obvious that Jesus decision to do his father's will was openly symbolized by baptism. It was after he came out of the water that Jehovah's spirit came upon him and Jehovah said those words to the hearing of John.
Note that Jesus went to a dedicated servant of God to have the baptism performed not to the sadducees or pharisees, likewise today (mat 28:35-39) baptism is done after the individual's dedication and perform by persons that also already have been baptized. The case of the ethiopian eunuch and Philip is a classic example (acts 8:35-39).
Someone might say 'I have been baptized and dedicated before in my church' but the question is to what teaching or principle was he dedicated? If such one was sprinkled as an infant or @ any other age, could such one dedicate himself to God?, my own answer here is NO. why because sprinkling is not the spiritually proper type of baptism (refer to the patern of Jesus and philip above) a person has to be completely immersed in water. Also many of the churches to which they were formally baptized believe and teach the 'blessed trinity' which denies the Bible teaching of Jehovah's eternal supremacy and his son's (Jesus) being always obedient, subordinate and unequal to his father. And also the the immortality of the soul, contrary to the Bible teaching of the manner in which humans are created.
Therefore both dedication and water baptism acceptable to the true God will fully harmonize with the terms of his requirements written in his word the Bible; and every willing learner will eagerly conform to such righteous requirements.
I might stop there for now, but will also like to reiterate the fact that baptism is not the remover of sin but for repentance over sin (1cor 6:9-11)and determination to use our life in the divine will as set forth in the Sciptures. We are free moral agents with freedom to choose our course of life but such freedom comes with accountabilities and responsibilities.( Deut 30:15-17)
I greet you all

To ibukun obi

"Do our Masonic friends understand something about the Temple, and being Knights Templars and so on? We more." He goes on to say that Masons and other have,  "that little bit of truth".

You should have used some other googled reference and not the one you posted because you have just proved without doubt that HE WAS a MASON.  He calls them friends for instance and this is a characteristic of MASONS. 

Thanks for confirming to everyone what i posted.  Even though the article tries to dismiss the FACT it actually gives stronger adherence to it -

Whos the liar then

Jude 1:3-4

3 ¶ Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
4  For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

lastpage:

I also wonder, that they dont participate in "conflict/war or any kind", how would an "utopian society" be, if it were fully made up of J.W's? No Libya, No Iraq, No Somalia, No Kosovo, No Cold war, No Afghanistan, No Boko haram or OPC or MEND, (closer home), e.t.c

I wrote something related to that here.

I am forced to return to this thread because some JW's like Ibukun Obi need to be told the truth.

Back to the blood transfusion issue.

Jehovah Witnesses believe that accepting whole blood or a transfusion of any of the four primary components of blood (i.e., red cells; white cells; platelets; plasma) constitutes a violation of God's Law on blood. FACT!

Research has confirmed that white blood cells pass from mother to baby in the mother's milk. FACT!

Now although the baby has no say in the matter JW witness mothers knowing and deliberately feed their milk containing blood fractions into her baby and ALL the hypocrites who continue to claim they do not accept blood whatever the circumstances should realise henceforth the depth of closed circuit ignorance they live in.

Please Lastpage, I would love to see your take on this. Ibukun Obi, please leave this for intelligent people.

@Niyimat.
Thanks for your contribution I really enjoy it and hope it is informative to others too?

Now, l understand that no matter how "brilliant you are", it takes "an adult to make a decision 'to' dedication and progress to baptism"?


Now, one J.W. peep (mxxpunkxxx) claimed he was so brilliant, got baptized at 9yrs!

Is this a true reflection of "practicing J.W's" doctrine? Or am l mistaken?

Cheers.


@MyJoe:
Thanks for your referral. Like McDonalds, "l am loving it"/your discuss with Mssrs Williams on that page.
The issue of "God's real name and how it sounds" has been very fascinating to me!

I remember people like Moses used that name to great advantage and effectiveness so l was wondering: Could that be why "some crowd in the Jewish heirachy" of those days ensured we never knew it so we cant also use it like they did!

Imagine, a name that could "move mountains" and "create ways through the deeps"?

Okay, its wishful thinking, but then, why would J.W's tell us emphatically: This is God's name: Jehovah?
Why not something like "this is the "closest we can get" t God's name?

From what  l can gather, in simple "tureinchi", NO ONE KNOWS GOD"S EXACT NAME!
Thats fair enough, will do with the "closest" as it sounds!


MyJoe & R.Williams, Kindly grant me permission to reproduce some lines which really caught my attention:

Quote from: RWilliams on May 30, 2011, 02:05 AM
My Joe.
If all Christians stuck to bible teachings, in particular the teaching of Jesus, the third Reich would never have happened in the first place. WW1 and WW2 would not have happened. If you go outside Christianity, if the adherents of many other religions stuck to the essence of their teachings, much of the conflict we have on this world would be gone.

MyJoe
A fantastically, horribly, childishly simplistic approach to life! Let me show you how simplistic this approach is. Say, you, Mr Williams, are vegetarian. You are entering a jungle full of leopards and believing that, well, since you are a vegetarian, the leopards will not attack you! Of course, if everyone lived by the Bible’s prophecy about beating swords into plowshares there would be no Third Reich and WW1 and WW2. But are they? What you are saying is that if someone attacks my community with the stated intention of killing the men and enslaving the women and kids I should bring out a Bible and waive it in his face, telling him to go live by its principles! Ever heard of the phrase “real world”? The issue is not whether wars would happen if everyone lived by Isaiah 2:4 (let’s not talk about other parts of the Bible, for now) – they won’t! – the issue is since people are not living like that and wars do happen, what should you do when attacked by someone who wishes to kill you enslave your wife and kids?

Quote from: RWilliams
Most of the countries in WW1 were Christian, Imagine if every Catholic, Protestant and Church of England member (Including their hierarchy) took the same stand as the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Hitler would not have had an army to go to war with. Just because every other Christian goes against the bible teaching to be peaceable with all men, to turn the other cheek, and to love your enemies, does that mean that a true Christian should join them?

The whole problem with mankind is that "Man dominates man to his own injury" Jesus taught a "way" that is peaceable, making peace. If only everyone had followed it. Now if a JW had gone to war, Could a JW in Germany who killed his own English brother in the battle field in France really be showing the love that Jesus said would be a mark of his true followers? No.
The complexities of the world, Mr Williams! The world in which "man dominates man to his injury". Imagine Claude, an Englishman normally apolitical, doesn’t give a hoot about world affairs, but today he is scared that his country and the world is about to be destroyed and millions killed by a mad man called Hitler, so he decides to join the war and help stop Hitler. Then think of Pieter, a South African of European descent back in the 80’s; he believes that his is the master race which should dominate Africa so he signs up for military service in order to be deployed to Angola or Namibia. Are these two the same? If I am Claude and you asked me why I killed a member of my religion who was fighting on Hitler’s side that would be a very easy question to answer – “I have searched my conscience and found I am fighting a just cause. Now go ask the German what he was fighting for.” I admit that my examples are a bit simplistic,  (Now you see that both can be simplistic   )as many soldiers don’t tend to answer to these examples (Rommel fought gallantly “for Fuhrer and country” but then turned around and plotted against Hitler) but my point is that on, a case by case basis, people’s consciences should decide in these matters, not some old men living in Brooklyn and out of touch with day-to-day realities.


Quote from: RWilliams
Yes there are bad eggs in amongst the JW organisation, Jesus even said that there would be “Wolves in sheep’s clothing” but there ways eventually catch up with them and when it does unless they are willing to change them, and they are no longer able to remain in it. But if you look on the whole at the organisation, they are preaching the word in the entire inhabited earth, on a scale without precedence; they preach peace at any cost, especially amongst themselves. They encourage good morals as outlined in the bible, not the “new morality” the world has embraced, even if it labels them as intolerant (more like not permissive in my opinion).

MyJoe
True. The Witnesses pay much more attention to morality and holiness than most other Christian groups. And I used to think they were more moral, indeed. Things I have encountered in recent years tell me this is just wishful thinking. The Witnesses you encounter anywhere along the west coast of Africa are just as “sharp” as everyone. They push “those things” aside and “do what they have to do”. You know religious folk are very good at capitalizing on one particular sin. For brother A it might be fornication – he will avoid that one but he will lie and cheat. For sister b it might be something else. There are some good ones, of course – just as in other faiths. And if you seriously think that what you call “new morality” – the loosening of intimate restrictions – that has swept the world since the second half of the century that ended not too long ago has somehow left your church members behind, you, sir, should open your eyes.

Quote from: RWilliams
These are the “fine fruits” that indentify a true follower.

MyJoe: Yes. You do preach some fine fruits. But you also preach some bad ones.

Quote from: RWilliams
I agree that in the early days they had some strange ideas, as did many of the Adventist/ Pentecostal religions that were springing up around that time,

MyJoe: Good. So can you, please, answer me just one question: If your church had false teachings just like the other churches that sprang up at the same time it did, on what basis, then, did Jesus select it among the rest when he is said to have come for inspection in 1918?

Quote from: RWilliams
but more and more they are moving away from observing times and seasons, leaving that in god’s hands and concentrating on learning about god, examining what he wants from humans, and helping people to put bible principles in their life.
Bravo!
All that’s left is for God to grant them the wisdom to see the arrogance and presumptuousness in claiming to speak for God when God did not expressly speak to you and the courage to admit their horrendous mistakes on prophecies and issues like blood transfusion and tell their members to stop calling other Christians “so-called Christians”.

MyJoe
[/b]Quote:
It is my personal opinion that they are not progressive at all. In fact, I wonder how you can say they are progressive. They are stuck in their old ways, refusing to admit mistakes and carry out a badly-needed re-examination of their teaching, from A to Z. Shifting the dates of Jesus’ coming is brought about, not by rational progression, but because Jesus has constantly refused to show up on the advertised dates. Seems he won’t be pushed by anyone.[b]

[b]R.Williams: JW’s have never shifted the date of Jesus coming or presence, he came in 1914 and they still believe that.


MyJoe: They have. Have you forgotten, Mr Williams? JW’s taught that Jesus returned invisibly in 1874 and would then bring things to conclusion in 1914. This doctrine was officially changed in 1925 to say Jesus returned invisibly in 1914 and will conclude things before those who alive and old enough to be wise in 1914 (the 1914 generation) all died. The 1914 generation was later change to… and then changed to… you know all that.

Quote from: RWilliams
1925, 1975 etc were just over-anticipation on some members of the organisation for the time his kingdom would start to “crush and put an end” to the system as we know it (Daniel 2:44). Really that is in god’s hands.
Matters carried by your church’s official journals, written and endorsed by the church’s highest ruling members, the men who formulate policies and doctrines for the church, the men said to be "spirit-directed", the channel God is using to dish out truths to mankind in the end times. You call that “some members”? I understand people go to any length to defend their religion, but this is like a Catholic saying a doctrine deliberated on by the College of Cardinals and issued by the Pope ex cathedral amounts to the opinion of some members.

MyJoe

[/b]Their willingness to preach the idea that one of these days God’s angels will pass through this way and slaughter everyone, except members of the Jehovah’s Witnesses faith, only shows the size of their mind.


[b]R. Williams: Well, if they just so happen to be “my true followers” (and you would be silly to preach that unless you believe there is such a group), and the bible just so happens to be Gods word to mankind, you are calling the mind of god small, because unless you blind your mind to what the bible says about it, you can’t escape the fact that the bible preaches that there will be “a great day of god the almighty” that many are on the “road to destruction” and few on the “road to life” and that he will “bring to ruin  those ruining the earth”. This is not something that JW’s have come up with, it is there in black and white in numerous scriptures, we are merely preaching the good news of the better system to come, and at the same time warning of and helping people to get out of the system here at present and align their lives with God’s teachings. If people don’t take note, who have they got to blame?
Really, the earth and universe and what is right is so much bigger than us as humans. If mankind in general thinks it knows better than God and goes out of its way to reject his words, and ruins the earth because of such rejection, who are we to call God into account for setting up an organisation who pursue peace with all men, and getting rid of any who reject his requirements, (including those who call themselves his followers but still acting lawlessly). You are a proud silly man if you do.

MyJoe: When did God set up this organization? You see, what you are really talking about here is your interpretation of the Bible. The idea that on “a great day of God the Almighty” he will kill all those who failed to see the truth preached by Jehovah’s Witnesses is something JWs have come up with. You were told that God picked your religion out of the others at some point. Did you ever ask how God communicated this acceptance? Who did he tell? No, you just believed! Why? You do not think that question is worth asking? Probably because you already believed that a religion that quotes the Bible so fluently and teaches that God does not burn people in hell must be right about anything it says. Yours is not the only religion that claims God is its own founder or member and will punish everyone else who refuses to join. What many find surprising is the arrogance of it all and the willingness of many to believe.

As to God punishing some people and rewarding others, that is a viable idea. But who will he reward and who will he punish? JWs and non-JWs respectively? You wish! Let your Bible answer that question for us:

Matt 25:31-46, NIV
  31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
  34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

Now, l love that genuine discussion! A lot of 'honest truths' are embedded there-in!!
Thats how an intelligent discussion that fosters better understanding, should be conducted.

@R. Williams

Karaite Jews,[11] as proponents of the rendering Jehovah, state that although the original pronunciation of יהוה has been obscured by disuse of the spoken name according to oral Rabbinic law, well-established English transliterations of other Hebrew personal names are accepted in normal usage, such as Joshua, Isaiah or Jesus, for which the original pronunciations may be unknown.[12] They also point out that "the English form Jehovah is quite simply an Anglicized form of Yehovah,"[12] and preserves the four Hebrew consonants "YHVH" (with the introduction of the "J" sound in English). Some argue that Jehovah is preferable to Yahweh, based on their conclusion that the Tetragrammaton was likely tri-syllabic originally, and that modern forms should therefore also have three syllables.[13]

The truth is we don’t know the true pronunciation, but Jehovah has for many years been the anglicized pronunciation of the divine name, as are Jesus, Joshua and countless other Hebrew names that no one raises a question about .
There are a lot of arguments for Yahweh and also for Jehovah as being the most correct, however, rhyming phrases of the Psalms seem to indicate a 3 syllable name, and there is research that also indicates that although there is no letter for “ J” in Hebrew it is still highly possible that the sound was still used.

You could find a thousand pages with different arguments on this, but the important thing is that one’s realises that god has a personal name and calls upon it.

@LagosShia

Jehovah's witnesses themselves should not claim a monopoly on god's name or tell us that God can be refered to by no name other than "Jehovah",because they themselves are either not sure of His name to be "Jehovah" (in english) or they like all other religious groups who believe in One Almighty and Universal Unique and Unseen God also call God different names to fit His position and names that are not associated with paganism.

the watch tower has rendered the tetragrammaton into different words in different languages.for example,in english He is refered to as "Jehovah".in Japanese "Ehoba".in Arabic,"Yahwah".

these are already 3 names and there are many more depending on the language!

so on what basis would Jehovah's witnesses claim monopoly on god's name or that only them know His name or even that only the tetragrammaton should be used to refer to God?

also,what prevents Jehovah's witnesses from accepting other beautiful words that truly represent God and people refer to Him with,just as the tetragrammaton refers to Him?

for further reading on this subject,you can discover that the tetragrammaton is mentioned in the Holy Quran and you can also discover that God's name is "ALLAH" even in the bible!

here is an article by Ahmad Deedat with the topic:"What is His Name".
3.) the tetragrammaton or four letters (YHWH) is not found once in the new testament manuscripts.that is in the entire new testament,the "name of God" that jehovah's witnesses teach others to be the only acceptable way of calling God is not found in the new testament of 27 books! it looks like Jesus forgot what God's name is.or may be as they would argue that the new testament books have their manuscripts in greek and not their presumed "original" hebrew,the tetgragrammaton was expunged.if that is the case,and they presume God's "only" four letters that refer to His "only" name can be expunged,then that casts a doubt on the bible as to what more could have being expunged.

With "anticipated permission form LagosShia!
BTW: I am yet to "check out the link you supplied so dont be offended, l definitely will.

Now, this is very hillarious, in a serious way, l mean!

in sequence to what i've written in the above post,jehovah's witnesses are taught a preaching technique which is more or less a deception when preaching or trying to convert others.they are taught to ask:"what is His name".that is: "what is god's name".

many who are not jehovah's witnesses or are not well informed on the subject would reply His name is "god".the jehovah's witness would reply "god is a title and not a name",so "what is His name".you will be shocked and puzzled to know you do not know god's own name!!!then he (the jehovah's witness) would say with a smile "His name is jehovah".so,they catch you napping.and ofcourse in that way you must join them because who better than them knows "jehovah".you are simply impressed and taught that they are "jehovah's people".that is how they "catch fish" and convert others on a matter they themselves know so little about as explained in my post above.

@1stcitizen: and as to the issue of "blood transfusion" which you asked me to weigh-in on, l can only give you my own "personal opinion" on the issue
The official "J.W position" would be better addressed by practicing members of that Group.
Can any one of them PLEASE contribute?


Hope our weekends are unfolding without stress?
Am off on a bike ride with one of my sons!
Cheers to ALL.

You have done very well Lastpage for this thread if most NL is as informative as this we would have less fight and prejudice in Nigeria.

That said I was raise in the Christian organization by my mum but accepted the truth when I was 22yrs that was when I got baptized after I had sojourned other religious organization and debated enough about doctrines with my mum and the witnesses and even experimented with the occult, but today I give God thanks because I have found the truth in JW my sojourns ends there. I am not the best of them but I try my best to serve God sometimes bad influences and our in-born imperfection drift us to d bad waters and well the consequences is discipline which I have experienced. Well to the thread I will love to clear you on the teaching of birthday celebration and other celebrations inclusive that JW don’t participate please bear with me this could be lengthy. Your comment was this:-

BIRTHDAYS

As it relates Birthday celebrations, the “excuse” they give (Jesus never celebrated his birthday, Peter’s head was cut-off during such a Birthday celebrations), are myopic, in my own opinion.
Every Birthday does not and did not end that way!
In fact, such celebrations can be used for good or evil, just like the J.W’s festivals at Igeduma or Sango-Otta in those days, can be used for good or evil!
It is not the Birthday that was wrong, it is the way it was celebrated, back then!
Is it then a case of "moral persuasion" not to celebrate Birthdays or a "biblical injunction"?

if it is the later, it is sacrosanct but if it is the former, then it is only obligatory but not a requirement and therefore, not binding!

Basically, it is because they respect the Word of God and are keenly interested in responding to its indications.
Birthday celebrations are popular world wide and have been for millenniums. Often there will be a party, with presents being given. But does the Bible say anything about birthdays?
It can be said at the outset that the Bible does not discourage generous giving to a loved one. (Gen. 33:10, 11; Luke 15:22; 2 Cor. 8:19) Nor does it discourage enjoying a feast or party, for eating and drinking in moderation are recommended as one means of enjoying life. (Eccl. 3:12, 13) Jesus shared in a wedding feast. Job’s children held what may have been harvest feasts that occasioned family reunions. Abraham had a feast when Isaac was weaned. (John 2:1, 2; Job 1:4, 5, 13; Gen. 21: And even though it was not commanded by God, the Jews held an annual festival on the anniversary of the rededication of the temple, which feast Jesus attended.—John 10:22, 23.
The Bible does, though, indicate that certain caution is needed, for it would not be proper to share in just any celebration regardless of its reason or nature. (Ex. 32:1-6; 1 Pet. 4:3; 1 Cor. 10:20, 21) What about noting and celebrating birthdays?
Obviously, many true worshipers kept record of birth dates. Priests and others knew their ages. Such a matter was not left to guesswork. (Num. 1:2, 3; 4:3; 8:23-25) But there is nothing in the Scriptures to suggest that true worshipers had annual birthday celebrations.
The Bible reports only two birthday celebrations, both of persons who were not servants of the true God.
How are we to look at these two birthday celebrations? Is it just coincidental that they are mentioned and that both were for persons not having God’s approval? Or could it be that Jehovah deliberately had these details recorded in his Word, which he says is “beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight”? (2 Tim. 3:16) At the very least it can be said that these two accounts Biblically put birthday celebrations in a bad light, as a practice of those estranged from God.
Also, it is worth noting that God did not record the exact date of Jesus’ birth, which certainly would be the most important birthday if God’s servants were to celebrate birthdays. Instead, the Bible indicates the date of Jesus’ death and instructs Christians to commemorate that as an anniversary each year. (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:23-26) This harmonizes with the fact that the Bible says that the day of a person’s death is more significant than the day of his birth if he has made a good name with God during his lifetime.—Eccl. 7:1, 8.
Consistent with the Scriptural indications, the early Christians did not hold birthday celebrations.
“The notion of a birthday festival was far from the ideas of the Christians of this period in general.”—The History of the Christian Religion and Church During the First Three Centuries, by Augustus Neander.

Also celebrating birthdays is rooted in superstition and false religion, but that is not the sole or prime reason why Jehovah’s Witnesses avoid the practice.
There is no denying, though, that numerous reference works reveal the superstitious and religious antecedents of celebrating birthdays. The Encyclopedia Americana (1991 edition) notes: “The ancient world of Egypt, Greece, Rome, and Persia celebrated the birthdays of gods, kings, and nobles.” It says that the Romans observed the birth of Artemis and the day of Apollo. In contrast, “although the ancient Israelis kept records of the ages of their male citizens, there is no evidence that they had any festivities on the anniversary of the birth date.”
Other reference works go into considerable detail about the origin of birthday celebrations: ‘Birthday parties began years ago in Europe. People believed in good and evil spirits, sometimes called good and evil fairies. Everyone was afraid of these spirits, that they would cause harm to the birthday celebrant, and so he was surrounded by friends and relatives whose good wishes, and very presence, would protect him against the unknown dangers that the birthday held. Giving gifts brought even greater protection. Eating together provided a further safeguard and helped to bring the blessings of the good spirits. So the birthday party was originally intended to make a person safe from evil and to insure a good year to come.’—Birthday Parties Around the World, 1967.
The b ook explains, too, the origin of many birthday customs. For example: “The reason [for using candles] goes back to the early Greeks and Romans who thought that tapers or candles had magical qualities. They would offer prayers and make wishes to be carried up to the gods by the flames of candles. The gods would then send down their blessings and perhaps answer the prayers.” Other such background information is collected on pages 69 and 70 of Reasoning From the Scriptures, published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.
As mentioned, however, more is involved in this question than whether celebrating birthdays was or still is religious. The Bible brings up the matter of birthdays, and mature Christians wisely are sensitive to any indications it gives.
God’s servants of old noted when individuals were born, which allowed them to figure ages. We read: “Noah got to be five hundred years old. After that Noah became father to Shem, Ham and Japheth.” “In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, . . . all the springs of the vast watery deep were broken open.”—Genesis 5:32; 7:11; 11:10-26.
As even Jesus mentioned, among God’s people childbirth was a blessed, happy event. (Luke 1:57, 58; 2:9-14; John 16:21) Yet, Jehovah’s people did not memorialize the date of birth; they kept other anniversaries but not birthdays. (John 10:22, 23) Encyclopaedia Judaica says: “The celebration of birthdays is unknown in traditional Jewish ritual.” Customs and Traditions of Israel observes: “The celebration of birthdays has been borrowed from the practices of other nations, as no mention is made of this custom among Jews either in The Bible, Talmud, or writings of the later Sages. In fact, it was an ancient Egyptian custom.”
That Egyptian connection is clear from a birthday celebration related in the Bible, one that true worshipers were not observing. It was the birthday feast of the Pharaoh who ruled while Joseph was in an Egyptian prison. Some of those pagans may have been happy over the feast, yet the birthday was linked to the beheading of the chief of Pharaoh’s bakers.—Genesis 40:1-22.
A similar unfavorable light is shed on the other birthday celebration described in the Scriptures—that of Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great. This birthday celebration is hardly presented in the Bible as just innocent festivity. Rather, it occasioned the beheading of John the Baptizer. Then, “his disciples came up and removed the corpse and buried him and came and reported to Jesus,” who ‘withdrew from there into a lonely place for isolation.’ (Matthew 14:6-13) Do you imagine that those disciples or Jesus felt drawn to the practice of birthday celebrations?
Given the known origin of celebrating birthdays, and more important, the unfavorable light in which they are presented in the Bible, Jehovah’s Witnesses have ample reason to abstain from the practice. They do not need to follow this worldly custom, for they can and do have happy meals any time during the year. Their gift giving is not obligatory or under the pressure of a party; it is spontaneous sharing of gifts at any time out of generosity and genuine affection.—Proverbs 17:8; Ecclesiastes 2:24; Luke 6:38; Acts 9:36, 39; 1 Corinthians 16:2, 3.

So even though the Bible does not contain a specific prohibition against birthday celebrations, Jehovah’s Witnesses have long noted the Scriptural indications and have not celebrated birthdays. In this, they harmonize with the pattern of the earliest Christians.
Also, while there is no Bible justification for annually celebrating the date of a Christian’s death, we can agree that the day of death is better than the day of his birth. Thus we should concentrate, not on the day of birth but on each day imitating Christ and reflecting God’s image. Should we die, then we will have glorified God by our way of life, and he will surely remember us.—Heb. 5:9; 11:6; Phil. 3:8-11.

Cheers.
I will happly contribute to other issues trinity, tithing, blood transfusion (even though this is a debate till now both in religious, circular and medical field) etc as our busy schedule permits.

trinity, a doctrine that says there are three in one God is not a bible teaching. God is One and not three persons, Det 6:4 reads ' Listen O Isreal;Jehovah our God is one God. Malachi 2;10 reads Is it not one father that all of us have? It is not One God that has created us? why is it that that we deal treacherously with one another profaning the covenant of our fore fathers? read Rom3;29/30.Revelation 3;14.Colocians1;15 reads ' He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. meaning God is invisible and he said anyone that sees him must die. Jesus was visible, was transformed into Mary's womb, born, lived a human life with flesh and blood, ate food and drank and even died. In contrast, The Almighty God is a spirit and cant be associated with these. read Isaiah 44;6. Philippians 2;10,11 says 'And every tongue should openly confess that Jesus is lord to the Glory of the Father. meaning very thin Jesus does including us humans to the Glory of the Most High God. In John 8;42, Jesus said 'If God were your father you would love me for from God i come forth and am here NEITHER HAVE I COME OF MY OWN INNITIATIVE AT ALL BUT THE ONE THAT SENTH ME FORTH. Now answer me, Could Jesus Chris be the same Almighty God and still be referring to someone superior to him who has sent him forth? Could he be The Most high and still be saying he dint come of his own initiative but his father? Jesus Himself even thou he was exulted to a high place did not make him self equal to God but humbly submitted himself as ransom scarifies for all.

@hejonny09,

I would appreciate your take on my last post below.

I am forced to return to this thread because some JW's like Ibukun Obi need to be told the truth. Back to the blood transfusion issue. Jehovah Witnesses believe that accepting whole blood or a transfusion of any of the four primary components of blood (i.e., red cells; white cells; platelets; plasma) constitutes a violation of God's Law on blood. FACT! Research has confirmed that white blood cells pass from mother to baby in the mother's milk. FACT! Now although the baby has no say in the matter JW witness mothers knowing and deliberately feed their milk containing blood fractions into their babies

@thejonny09:
Thanks a million, l really appreciate the in-depth analysis you have provided.
I am going to respond to some "grey areas" that l observed in your post, in line with my earlier question concerning the place of a "biblical injunction" and " a moral adoption", which l think is at the root of this B/day palaver!
But please allow me time to "marshal my opinion", from a personal point of view (as l cannot speak for others but express it, how l see it).

In doing this, l do not intend to change your position (not even in my dreams ) but wish to share my feelings and why l feel that way, with you and others, on the particular item of Birthdays (its something we can all do without, kini big deal sef? but l want to understand "why" l should avoid it)

Once again, thanks and Cheers.


@Beync:
Now that is a very good submission.
I belong to the school of thought that says "Christ is the "son" of God, the Father". A father-and-son relationship.
I also subscribe to the notion that God is a Spirit and his spirit is "Holy" 'cos He Himself is a Holy God!

Now, if Christ told his disciples just before he was "caught up" into the clouds (ascension) that he would send "the Holy Spirit" to them, to comfort and strengthen them, while he was away, what can we deduce from this? And what can we "completely isolate and discard"?

1.) Could he be referring to himself (when he was actually with them there!)
2.) Could he be referring to his father? (Ever seen a "messenger" sending his "principal" on an errand?)
3.) Could he be referring to a "third" party, since we know he was going to meet his father?

Whatever we can deduce from the above, might help us a wee-bit to make certain distinctions as to whether it could be the same person/personae in all these!
Some have said that it is because "they have the same purpose, therefore they should or must have the same essence".
That is, "all three are one but manifesting with different physical attributes"!
Does this tie neatly with the Bible scriptures where Jesus made allusion to a separate "physical entity" as his father?

Let the other school of thought throw their weight-in, on these things.

Again, thanks for taking the time to put this down.
Cheers.

Hello All-

@Lastpage, sorry this is coming in a little late. Some personal runnings here and there had taken away all my concentration on this.

Still on these controversial talk about JWs. There are definitely numerous topics and opinions that could be developed on JWs, but i would want to by way of persuasion advise that we all observe, such that we keep free from arguments (phil 2:4). Some of the posts by some posters here had been very objective and such is encouraged, but i also noticed that, some posts are made out of hatred, that is not cool enough. We dont have to hate anyone as christ followers, no matter how questionable the docrines of JWs are, one thing is for sure, they would never have the intention to hurt you or strive to become your enemy, Jesus said we should love our enemies(Matt 5:44) ,right ? How much more those that at least are striving to worship God just the way you are trying to do. Buttom line is YOU DON'T have to hate no one if your worship would be acceptable to God in the first place.

@Lastpage once again, i did not forget your earlier response, most especially on the issue of Trinity, actually a JW in the house, beync i guess, actually put up a fine write up on this.

Beync:

trinity, a doctrine that says there are three in one God is not a bible teaching. God is One and not three persons, Det 6:4 reads ' Listen O Isreal;Jehovah our God is one God. Malachi 2;10 reads Is it not one father that all of us have? It is not One God that has created us? why is it that that we deal treacherously with one another profaning the covenant of our fore fathers? read Rom3;29/30.Revelation 3;14.Colocians1;15 reads ' He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. meaning God is invisible and he said anyone that sees him must die. Jesus was visible, was transformed into Mary's womb, born, lived a human life with flesh and blood, ate food and drank and even died. In contrast, The Almighty God is a spirit and cant be associated with these. read Isaiah 44;6. Philippians 2;10,11 says 'And every tongue should openly confess that Jesus is lord to the Glory of the Father. meaning very thin Jesus does including us humans to the Glory of the Most High God. In John 8;42, Jesus said 'If God were your father you would love me for from God i come forth and am here NEITHER HAVE I COME OF MY OWN INNITIATIVE AT ALL BUT THE ONE THAT SENTH ME FORTH. Now answer me, Could Jesus Chris be the same Almighty God and still be referring to someone superior to him who has sent him forth? Could he be The Most high and still be saying he dint come of his own initiative but his father? Jesus Himself even thou he was exulted to a high place did not make him self equal to God but humbly submitted himself as ransom scarifies for all.

Just to buttress the quote above, without ambiguity, the bible says in (phil 2:5-11) and i quote directly:
"Keep this mental attitude in YOU that was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. 7 No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men. 8 More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake. 9 For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name, 10 so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, 11 and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father"

There are so many reference works in the bible that rejects the Trinity doctrine. But at least the whole world should understand why it would be difficult for JW to support the idea of trinity with those bible verses, JWs are only trying to keep in them, that same mental attitude in Christ as that verse 5 implies.

1stCitizen:

I am forced to return to this thread because some JW's like Ibukun Obi need to be told the truth.

Back to the blood transfusion issue.

Jehovah Witnesses believe that accepting whole blood or a transfusion of any of the four primary components of blood (i.e., red cells; white cells; platelets; plasma) constitutes a violation of God's Law on blood. FACT!

Research has confirmed that white blood cells pass from mother to baby in the mother's milk. FACT!

Now although the baby has no say in the matter JW witness mothers knowing and deliberately feed their milk containing blood fractions into her baby and ALL the hypocrites who continue to claim they do not accept blood whatever the circumstances should realise henceforth the depth of closed circuit ignorance they live in.

Please Lastpage, I would love to see your take on this. Ibukun Obi, please leave this for intelligent people.

@1stCitizen: Well well well, the research that confirmed that white blood cells pass from mother to baby in the mother's milk, is from Man, right?
fine, the law that says you should refrain from blood is from Man, right? No, it's from God.(Acts 15:28,29).
No matter how wise men could be, his wisdom cannot surpass that of God. Let us place God's reasoning and thoughts above ours. Do not lean upon your own understanding, neither that of a man like you, but trust in God(prov 3;5).

Image123:

J.W? Those guys that don't want to go to heaven? Well, off i go preparing to go to Heaven.

@poster, heaven? ok.

divine2043:

Jehovah's Witness is a cult.

@Poster, I wouldnt say that. Direct accusation might not be the best way to help people.
Using bible passages to correct peoples view would be the most efficient.

@lastpage, Jesus said he was going to send the disciple holy spirit to confort them yes becos he was living them among the wicked world and he knows satan is going to attact and hence they would need the conforter. Yes Jesus did not refer to himself as the holy spirit hence he said he would send them holy spirit. he is correct becos Read what he said John12:49 'Becos i hav not spoken of my own impulse, but the father himself who sent me ha s given me commandment as to what to tell and what to speak. so his promise to send them holy spirit is in accordance with what his father has sent him to say and do. remember having conqered the world and ascended to the heavens he was going to sit at the right hand of God with all power vested on him, Now sending the holy spirit i dont see it as a big deal whether he is the one sending or his father but in all he is working according to what his father has commanded him to do. Can you rember what happened immediatly after Jesus baptism? God sent decleard his approval on Jesus thru Holy Spirit descending on him ' This is my beloved son to whom am well pleased. You can easily see how God, Jesus, and the Holy spirit are works as distint persons but depends on the seprem direction of the Almighty Father Jehovah God. Now look at how Paul clearly stated the positions of all as regards to who is greater amng the other, 1 Corint 11;3 it says; But i want you to know that the head of every man is the Christ , in turn, the head of a woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God. Trying to twart this devine arrangement by say Christ is equal to God, meaning man is equal to christ and so woman is equal to man is totally unaceptable and non biblical.

On the issue as to why we dont involv in political affairs of the world so as to help make decisions and actions that would better the situation in the world. Firstly, when we say we are no part of the world does not mean we dont leave in the world or has nothin to do with the world rather the world here refers to mankind astranged from God and in submision to satan. we are affected by all that is happening in the world hence we earnestly seeking for relieve as soon as possible cos satan is  bent on pressing us so that we denouce our faith, but that would never hapen. The world is riddiled with corruption, injustice and voilence and many people would want to make the world a better place but they are no match for THE UNSEEN RULER OF THIS WORLD. Only God can get rid of satan and will utterly destroy him. That wonderful prospect is key element of proclaiming his kingdom. we are convinced that onlyGod' kingdom gonern by Christ will bring lasting peace and happiness to the earth.

For now, we there are several authorities that requires our willing subjection and we do just that!! Rom 13;1-7 'let every soul be in subjection to the superior authority for there is no authority except by God. meaning; They exist by his permision. think of the services they provides Read Rom 13;6 with regards to taxes and other legal obligation JWS conduct themselves honestly. Only one on exemption like paul, when  Man law is Contradicts with God's law. We obey God rather then men.

Human governments holds society together, performing functions that fits in for the present time, we thus remain in subjection to these authorities while we give priority to God's law and authority.

Read jeremaiah10;23 ' To earthly man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step. Now In an institutional arrangement where everyone involve left the principles that ensures the success of the organisation and resort to working their own ways, what will hapen to the future of that Organisation? Failure! I think so. The truth as we can see is that man has refuse to seek God's ways while wondering in his own ways

In as much as we dont involve in politics to better the lives of peolple, JWS are actively invole both in the Spiritual and material rescue of people who has been  affected by natural and man made disasters worldwide and still doing it.  I dont hav the articles at hand but u can maker esearch urself, JWS has supplied Foods, Cloths, materials and erected houses for people who lost as a result of natural or man-made disaters. However we know that bringing the deteriorating condition of the earth to an end does not depend on our efforts we can only profer temporary solution but the lasting solution remain in God's hand hence we give priority to his Kingdom

Anu Yakubu:

@Poster, I wouldnt say that. Direct accusation might not be the best way to help people.
Using bible passages to correct peoples view would be the most efficient.

Yes you are right - i will do that next time -

@Beync

The real issue is that man, including yourself need redeeming. We are sinners (lawless) by nature and hence human government will always reflect the inner workings of mans depraved nature (i'm not a calvinist). The kingdom you talk of is not accessible to any creature except those who have experienced the regenerating birth of John 3:3. This comes by faith and is available to BOTH Jew and gentile - there is no discrimination. All are called to be "born-again".

The new Earth and the new Heaven that Christians wait for (Romans 8 22:25) has God make his tabernacle with men forever (Revelations 21-1-4) where those who were redeemed in Christ Cross or Tree ( the power of Christ resurrection extends to those before and after that historical event)

I will add there are no scriptures that support our exclusion from politics at all. If you choose not to it your personal conviction that all. We are called to be light and the salt of the Earth remember so our voice must be heard but proclaiming the Cross - "Thus saith the Lord"

Redemption is by Christ who is God and not "a" God (since if He is "a" God then Gods law of Exodus 20 4-6 would violate his word in John 1). Since the God used in John 1 is Jehovah God and 1John makes it a requirement to believe in this FACT as a necessity for salvation (believing that Christ is God) - since you would be worshiping another god if you believed that Christ had a beginning ((was created) or was Angel Michael for instance. You therefore need to embrace a doctrine not rewritten by someone who was a MASON but scripture inspired by the Holy Ghost

You can go read again. They wanted to make him the King but he refused and told them 'My kingdom is not of this world' If it were, Jesus would hav accepted. U can imagine crowning you the presidency withou you spending a dim to campaign.
It's not by force to rule, like you said, take it like it's a personal thing. we hav taken it like it's our personal thing, no big deal. cheers!