₦airaland Forum

peggywebbs: What are you saying? Are you even more confused?
Man is talking about about creation, miracles and you're talking about love your neighbor.
Anyway God did not choose Abraham, God blessed Abraham. Just like he blesses us today when we do the right things and obey his laws. God blessed Abraham because he was righteous.


Stop talking about ethnicity, unity, togetherness, you are part of the doctrine @LikeAking is talking about. Your organisation discriminates against people who are not part of their gathering, you see yourselves as the only Christians on earth which contradicts everything the bible talks about.

I’ll be the one to let you know that this word “discriminate” is such a strong word to use. How can an organization supposedly “discriminate” against those not part of them and you’ve never heard in the news one day that they attacked/killed/maimed those people not in their group?

Peggywebbs, you must be mistaken because Jehovah’s Witnesses do not raise themselves above others(like the way you think it is), in fact most of those taking the lead amongst us are very humble and meek(Numbers 12:3, 1Peter 5:5) that’s why you can never hear any Witness bearing a religious title despite the responsibilities he has or how long he has been one. Matthew 23:8-12
Neither do the Witnesses “discriminate” against those not in their group in fact, they are the most religious tolerant group in the world since they recognize that others have their viewpoints(1Peter 2:17)and would never inflict injury on others because they have a different religious opinion. Matthew 26:52

However, there’s a line that has to be drawn. Permissiveness and tolerance do not give room to acceptance/interchange of doctrines/beliefs. For that reason, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not practice interfaith(2Corinthians 6:14-17) because exclusive devotion is to be given to one God, Jehovah alone(Exodus 34:14) so if we practice interfaith with others, who do we now pray to? A trinity god or an image?

That‘s why most people wrongly interpret our stance of being separate from other religions(Revelation 18:4) as we being superior to them when that is not even the case. Spiritual prostitution(merging of various religious beliefs/practices) is a grievous sin before our God so the Witnesses try their best to avoid it by all means(Numbers 15:39) and endeavour to worship their God with spirit and truth. John 4:23,24

Anyway I'm not here to criticize anybody's followership..I myself don't believe in the church system. It is corrupt and full of people who want to control others. The word of God is available to everyone and thank God many people today are not fooled by Pharisee doctrines.

In other words, you’re a one-woman-Mopol Christian who has no one to call a brother or sister in the faith? Matthew 12:46-50, Mark 10:29,30
Please why did all the Christians in the first century have to subject themselves to the doctrines of the apostles i.e. why didn’t all go with this same “One-Man-Mopol” approach? Acts 2:42, 1Corinthians 11:2
Why did Paul specifically give instructions that the Christians “must not forsake their meeting together” ? Hebrews 10:24,25 see also Matthew 18:20

Myer:
The difference is in who they call father.
Christians believe in God their father. Demons believe in their father the devil.
Faith simply means strong conviction is someone or something.
Demons certainly have faith in God because supposedly they should have encountered the power of his supremacy.
After all their father the devil is supposed to be subject to God.

No this is not the point I was getting at. Clementoons asserted that merely believing that God exists, means that the person has faith in God which is not Biblical. That’s exactly the reason why I particularly quoted James 2:19 because if you consider the context of the Scriptures surrounding it, you’ll see that James’ reasoning tends towards what I was actually saying that belief in the existence of God is not enough but has to be channeled properly towards the right kind of faith and demonstrated through works/action. James 2:24-26

Clementoons: Ye have know the TRUTH, the TRUTH have already set you free , saved others also by that same TRUTH, that is what he commanded us to do , not all these sorts of things you are doing
CHRIST JESUS expect us to living a righteous life in this present pervese generation moreso, i am not in support of what they do but it will be totally destroy during the end of age where the antichrist will take over and also when GOD will melt the earth with a fervent heat. The word of GOD have already said that thou shall not bow to any graven image . Just believe he exist then that shows that you have faith in him ( heb 11vs1). He even told us that blessed is he that believeth and does not sees him

The Bible says that the demons also believe that God and Jesus exist. Luke 8:28, James 2:19
Does it now mean that the demons have faith in God?

Righteousness2: Some of these things we do are totally unnecessary..
Most of these things could be a form of idol.
The LORD JESUS, The Coming KING of kings is beyond this statue or that statue or anything made by hand.
GOD is a Spirit! They that worship , do it in Spirit and in truth.
Such Amout would have been used to Sponsor Missionaries to unreach places to Propagate the Gospel of JESUS.

Really? So you agree that Jesus never asked anybody to set up any image for him. Now can you channel the same energy towards holidays such as Christmas, Easter etc that Jesus never asked anybody to celebrate? Or when did Jesus ever ask anybody to venerate the cross as an object of worship?

heartbraker: In conversation with God satan suggest that job would turn away from God if he should lose his wealth and good fortune.
God agrees to put the matter to test. WHY CANT GOD KNW THE MIND OF JOB ON WHETHER HE IS TRUELY THRUSTWORTHY WITHOUT TESTING HIM?
DOES IT MEAN GOD IS NOT AN ALL KNOWING GOD OR JUST A WICKED GOD THAT JUST WANT TO DESTROY JOB?

Did you not notice that the first and second chapters of the book of Job highlights God publicly meeting with all his spirit sons?

Of course God can read the hearts of men(Proverbs 21:2, Jeremiah 17:10) but his spirit sons apparently do not have that ability.
Satan was making those claims and calling into question God’s way of dealing with his servants before the hearing and eyes of other angels. Job 1:6

Other parts of the Bible tell us that God is concerned with the way others view him because he has a reputation to maintain. Exodus 32:9-14

So for Satan to challenge God in that manner saying that nobody could not remain loyal to God under dire circumstances and that God supposedly “bribes” his people to serve him really brought a stain on God’s name so God had to clear his name of reproach by allowing Job to be tested so that others could see what was really in Job’s heart since the angels cannot read hearts(Job 2:1-5) and so that God’s name could be cleared off reproach. Matthew 6:9

This doesn’t mean that Job’s suffering was unimportant. At the very least it goes to show that God is never the cause of human suffering(James 1:13) and that Satan is the instigator of all the problems this world is facing currently. 1John 5:19, Revelation 12:9-12

queenjoseph:

Thy bow was made quite naked, according to the oaths of the tribes, even thy words.
Thou did cleave the earth with rivers. Habbakuk 3:9
I studied the above verse in the Bible, but I cannot really understand it.
Please who can explain what that verse means.
I will be very grateful.

Most people read books for several reasons—some are fascinated by the content, others would like to gain deeper knowledge/understanding about the subject matter. As the latter, the Bible promises that they’d find that understanding if they are persistent. Matthew 7:7,8
So even though many people are controversial about the “12 Minor Prophets”, the short book written by Habakkuk contains a vast number of Bible truths and is amongst the inspired writings which were penned down for our own benefit and instruction. Romans 15:4, 2Timothy 3:16

So I’d recommend that you do not quote the Scriptures without first considering the context/background. Habakkuk wrote the chapter 3 of his book while in sober reflection over what God had done in behalf of his people in the past(Habakkuk 3:1-4) and while under inspiration, he begins to relate all the ways available for God to destroy the nations who oppressed Judah. Compare Habakkuk 1:15-17 with Habakkuk 3:5-17
All the while, Habakkuk was resolved to maintain his joy in his God because of the solid faith and trust he had in God. Habakkuk 2:4, 3:18

queenjoseph:

Another verse of the Bible that I don't know whether the answer is yes or no is Amos 3:5 which says:
Can one take up a snare from the earth and has taken nothing at all?
I would have said that the answer is yes because you can set up a snare and by the time you went to see if it has caught something,
you discovered it has not caught anything.
So you can actually take the snare from there even when it has not caught anything.
But I need matured answer.
Can you actually take a snare from the earth without taking anything at all?

Consider other translations so as to grasp a better understanding of Amos 3:5

New International Version
Does a bird swoop down to a trap on the ground when no bait is there? Does a trap spring up from the ground if it has not caught anything?

New Living Translation
Does a bird ever get caught in a trap that has no bait? Does a trap spring shut when there’s nothing to catch?

Contemporary English Version
How can anyone catch a bird without using a net? Does a trap spring shut unless something is caught?


Actually the short answer to all those illustrative questions in Amos 3:3-5 is NO
Why?
Because Amos was only stressing to the Israelites that every effect(outcome) has an underlying cause. In this case, the main focus of those illustrations was to point to the fact that God had spoken through Amos that was why he was prophesying about the impending doom that the northern ten-tribe kingdom of Israel would in time face. Amos 3:7,8
Simply put, Amos would not have been a prophet(outcome) if God(the cause) had not appointed him and spoken through him. Amos 7:14-15

FatherOfJesus: I like your line of reasoning but atheism doesn’t really mean automatic understanding of scientific concepts even though science usually tends towards atheism than religion.
Atheism is just a disbelieve in the existence of God we have examples a lot of people who don’t even understand science becoming atheists.


Now to answer your question about whether I saw Big Bang happened and seen an animal evolve into another one. This reasoning is faulty in the sense that I don’t need to be around during the Big Bang to know it happened, I do not also need to see another animal turn into a different animal to see evolution. Whatever event that has ever happened in the universe, evidence are dropped to spot them.

Sorry but the only question I asked is “HAVE YOU SEEN THESE THINGS HAPPEN WITH YOUR OWN EYES BEFORE IN ACTION?”

And what I can grab from the highlighted is that the answer to my two questions that I asked is an outright NO?

Your question is like asking how scientist find out that the sun is hugely made of hydrogen and helium even as they have never visited the sun, you don’t have to visit the sun to know it’s chemical compositions, you just have to develop methods to measure it here from earth and that’s why spectrometry is handy here.

At least we can see the sun and feel the energy it radiates so that’s somewhat a baseless comparison. The issue is please did you ever see this Big Bang take place in real time?

Now let get back to Big Bang and evolution, first of all, evolution do not only happen in animals, we have observed firsthand one organism turning into another one, this explains the emergence of various forms of pathogens, we have also seen them evolve right under our microscopes, we have also observed speciation in some birds. We have seen evidence that the universe actually started from one point while employing the method of spectrophotometery which reveals the redshift of distant galaxies, we have evidence that these galaxies are moving away from us at accelerated speeds, they must have been so close to the point we are today in the past if this is the case. We have also discovered the microwave background, we heat it in radio communication like in tv and also created an image of how it’s dispersed around the universe, if you know what’re microwave images are then it’s easy to know that this is a result of a cooling universe, which was much hotter in the past. I can go on and on to tell you about it.
So because you are not there doesn’t mean you can’t find the evidence.
Science doesn’t teach you to believe, it teaches you to observe, analyze and understand stuffs.

Don’t you think that with your concluding comments, most especially the highlighted words, you have finally placed yourself in the shoes of religionists? Because I asked you a question that has to do with your school of thought and impressively, you delivered like I expected you to but my question is still unanswered because if you were not there when it happened, then whatever is said about it can be constituted as “mere hearsay” lacking concrete evidence and so it doesn’t in anyway make you any different from those who believe in a God.

MaxInDHouse:
LIES! LIES!! LIES!!!
Creatures often develop immunity to thing negatively effecting them. For instance there were several reports of pandemics in the past that claimed millions of lives but later as people continue to live with it they became immune to such plagues my friend the same thing is happening to other creatures so don't let anyone use that to deceive you, nothing has ever evolved from another thing NEVER!

The man thought he was talking to uneducated people. Just imagine someone claiming that something as basic as homeostasis(which every living thing on earth does by the second) is a mechanism/backup for the evolution theory? Really hilarious.

@OP, there’s just one statement from your entire post that caught my attention. The article wrote that “religious people tend to rely more on intuition” in other words what you mean is that belief in God is basically credulity i.e. blind faith and that it cannot stand the test of logical reasoning, correct? Well, I agree to some extent with you that most people who believe in a God cannot substantiate it with evidence therefore the real kind of “faith” is not something most people readily possess. 2Thessalonians 3:2
The type of “faith” the Bible really addresses has to be based on concrete evidence(Hebrews 11:1), so when the Bible speaks about God, it directs attention to viable facts. Romans 1:20

So this issue of “faith” is what we need to address and I believe atheism should also be put on a pedestal.
Now please don’t see this the wrong way or see it as a “tu quoque” argument, but as an atheist, did you personally witness the Big Bang take place or have you ever actually seen animals evolving from one specie to a new one with your own two eyes ? That is, apart from the numerous articles and textbooks written in support of it? (Remember that, mutations do not in anyway support your evolution theory, whether the macro- or the micro- type)

Hashabiah:
Oga, why do you speak as one devoid of wisdom? The conscience I referred to is one who has the Spirit of God. It is that Spirit that serves as a conscience to a Christian. It is that same Spirit that gives you the wisdom to discern from what is right from what is wrong. This is simple and I do not understand why you are having a hard time understanding this. Or is it because you JWs reject the Holy Spirit?

So where have I said that Jehovah’s Witnesses reject God’s holy spirit? The only difference between we and you is the way you expect God’s holy spirit to work. You expect some random voice to tell you something that is not found anywhere in the Bible while we ask for God’s holy spirit to guide us on understanding what is already penned down in the Bible. Luke 11:13, James 1:5

Hashabiah:
Why should I seek a principle when I have the Holy Spirit to do that?

I think you finally roped yourself because with this statement, God’s word the Bible means nothing to you therefore that random voice in your head is more preferable. Revelation 22:18-19
Well understood, sir/ma. Thanks for your time.

Hashabiah:
Did Jesus ever condemn smoking, paedophilia, slavery and all the other social issues we have in society?
Oga, don't play Jesus here. Let the Holy Spirit do the job. For scripture says the Holy Spirit will teach you all things (John14:26). I rest my case

YES, YES, since Jesus did not mention them as therefore it is totally OKAY practicing them if the person’s conscience and some random voice in his head allows him.



I already told you the way Jehovah’s Witnesses operate. There are a number of principles in the Bible that guide our lifestyle. Psalm 119:105, Isaiah 48:17-18
That word, “PRINCIPLE” is what you need to go and do more research on because it is totally different from some hard-and-fast “LAW”.

Hashabiah:
My oga, my God is not the author of confusion. Which is why if you have the Spirit of God(The Holy Spirit) you will be of one mind with another person has that same Spirit.
And how do we know this : Galatians 5:22, which says[b] "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such there is no law.".[/b].
The bolded here are the traits of someone with the Spirit of God and it is impossible to have all those traits if the Spirit of God is not in you.
So anyone, who has the Spirit of God will certainly possess those traits and the no one will need to tell him that smoking is bad.
For how can you have those traits and still be smoking...it is impossible

LOL! I thought you said the person’s conscience and some random voice claiming holy spirit should also allow him to do what he wants? Why quoting from the Bible now? What has Galatians 5:22 got to do with some random voice telling someone that smoking is NOT wrong? I thought we are doing some hard-and-fast rule on the Bible therefore principles should not guide us, right? Uncle, smoking is not in the Bible so if somebody in your church said that one voice in his head said smoking is OKAY then he is also a Christian, capeesh?

@Hashabiah, Jesus said he would reject an “anything-goes” type of Christian who refused to do as he commanded. Matthew 7:21-23, Luke 6:46
As for those who closely follow the pattern he set without addition or subtraction(John 13:15, 1Peter 2:21), Jesus said these ones would remain his friends forever. John 15:10

Hashabiah:
Excuses mixed with hypocrisy! That is the typical JW nonsense I see daily.

There’s actually nothing there in the question you asked. Some Scriptures that would aid in that case would be Leviticus 19:18, Psalm 127:3 etc but I said I’m not going to expatiate on them since you do not deserve the truth. Matthew 7:6

@Hashabiah, let me re-ask and elaborate more on my earlier question.

DappaD:
Did the Scriptures mention smoking or even saying it was a sin?

If according to you, you happen to hear random voices(which you claim is holy spirit) that tells you that smoking is wrong and your neighbour in your own church always hears the same random voices and also claims he said from holy spirit, but this time around he said that the voice told him that smoking is NOT wrong, will your neighbour still be considered a Christian ?

Hashabiah:
But you are a Jehovah's witness and that is the truth.

I’m proudly one of Jehovah’s Witnesses and that, I cannot hide.

Now tell us where slavery is condemned in the Bible? Also tell us where paedophilia is condemned. And if you cannot do any of these, then shut up and stop being silly

I said there are a number of Biblical principles that speak against such but since you are hot-tempered and easily offended when someone challenges you, I’m going to remain mute for those who deserve the truth. Matthew 7:6

Faber:
I don't have that time to compare and contrast. You are deviating. Both are God's words.
Show me a passage in the Bible and present where the book of Mormon countered it. That's to prove ur claim that The Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible.
let me give you an example: The Holy Bible VS The Holy Qur'an Vis-a-vis The Person and identity of Jesus Christ.
The Holy Bible preaches that Jesus Christ born of Mary, is the son of God and one in mind and spirit with the Father God.
The Holy Qur'an holds that Isa(Jesus Christ) born of Maryam(Mary) is just one of the Prophets of Allah. While Prophet Mohammed is the true representative of Allah.
So that's what I expect you to do.



Don't just ask me to start comparing the Book of Mormon and The Bible to see which one is better. Are you aware that we read and pray with both the Holy Bible and the Book of Mormon? Are we against the Holy Bible?


Quote a passage in the Bible and quote a passage contradicting it in the Book of Mormon.or you find something good and busy yourself with.
Shalom

Actually you do not have to get yourself all worked up because I said there are contradictions between both books. Before I proceed, can you please answer that question I earlier asked? Thanks.

DappaD:

Okay. It is well-documented that Joseph Smith supposedly received some new “revelations” from an angel named Moroni, correct?

Hashabiah:
Oga the bible is silent on Slavery, Education, Paedophilia, and a whole lot of other social issues. And what is not condemned in the Bible cannot be attributed to sin. But because for conscience sake, we turn to the Holy Spirit for guidance.
So get that into your head and stop being silly.
But since you are JW, I think folly is your second name

The Bible speaks LOUD & CLEAR for those who are seeking the answers to such those three questions you stated there. Hebrews 4:12
That’s why I said there are numerous principles in that same Bible that can assist someone who really wants to worship God with spirit and truth. John 4:24

LOL! See your concluding statement, “But since you are JW” seriously though?
Later it is the same people like you who will rush and say we have a different Bible when we begin quoting words of divine wisdom from the Bible everyone is familiar with. Ephesians 6:17

MaxInDHouse:
The truth has ran through his veins with our posts but he doesn't want it yet he can't ignore because he's having sleepless nights due to the truth he's been hearing from JWs!

Reminds me of the Pharisees who were always following Jesus everywhere and looking for avenues to either bait him(Matthew 22:15, Luke 6:7) or assassinate him. Mark 11:18

The problem I have with those Pharisees is that they claimed Jesus was a satanist(cultist) (Matthew 12:24) and a mad man(Mark 3:21) but they still wanted a satanist and a madman to conform to their own standards? Matthew 15:2

That’s exactly what’s going on here with MightySparrow but he doesn’t seem to get it.

Hashabiah:
Oga, do not use scripture to justify what you cannot defend. The bible is silent on many issues which is why as a true Christian, you need the Holy Spirit for direction. And once your conscience does not condemn the act, then it is not ungodly.

So if this your Holy Ghost should tell you that it is acceptable and tells the next person that it is not, what can you now say then? You should have just said that what is written in the Bible makes no sense to you and that you would rather like to set your own standards yourself. Romans 10:1-3

You claimed that the Bible is silent on many things. While that is true, however there are some things you cannot reconcile if you want to tow that direction. For example, did the Scriptures mention smoking or even saying it was a sin? Is it not the principle stated at Romans 12:2 and 2Corinthians 7:1 that tells us that such is wrong?

@bolded, you came again with conscience matter. Okay there were some ancient settlements in the past such as the Aztecs who carried out gruesome human sacrifices to their false gods, does it make it acceptable since their conscience allowed them to do so?

The human heart is more treacherous than anything so if we follow our own hearts without guidance, we’ll land into serious trouble. Jeremiah 17:9

Hashabiah:
Alot of things are not written in the Bible but it does not mean you should not observe them. That is why they are called doctrines

Hashabiah:
Of course...so long as it edifies Christ.

Are you aware that presumptuousness is a very serious sin before God which is even closely linked to pride? Psalm 19:13, Proverbs 11:2

The entire Bible is inspired of God(2Timothy 3:16) and it was written for our instruction(Romans 15:4) so that means everything we need to know about how to offer worship to God(John 4:24) is stated therein so being presumptuous and setting the standards for God is not acceptable according to Romans 10:3 see also Revelation 22:18-19

MaxInDHouse:
Òrò di hùn, òrò pè sì je ò òrò di hùn!

My brother how far? Did anything happen between you and MightySparrow that he’s always following you and quoting you everywhere and everytime like a pest?

Faber:
The Book of Mormon does not contradict the Bible. Talk what you know pls. Name one Episode in the Bible that the Book of Mormon rejected as false.

Easy. We are not quarrelling. Let’s just compare the Bible and the boM, shall we?

Faber:
There are no contradictions between the book of Mormon and the Bible. I used to think along that line before until I read the book of Mormon cover to cover. The Book of Mormon contains references and footnotes of episodes in the Bible. It is more of complementary to the Bible than contradictory.

Okay. It is well-documented that Joseph Smith supposedly received some new “revelations” from an angel named Moroni, correct?

Oh and about the contradictions, I assure you there are some if not a lot.

Faber:
We follow the Bible from A-Z...and have other inspired teachings. Thanks

Did Joseph Smith really say that the boM was the “most correct” of any book on earth, including the Bible? Why are there a number of differences(would I call it contradictions?) between the boM and the Bible?

RandomGuy48: Basically none of my points are actually addressed in the rant about Constantine (who I didn't even mention in my post). The only part of it that relates in any way is it asking the question of "So how can the institution of this so-called “Easter” celebration have any significance before God if the Constantine in question was not acting according to the principles found in the Scriptures?"

The problem is, Easter predates Constantine by quite a bit, so this question is moot.

The problem is, the early Christian apostles and the congregation(before it became ridden by false teachings) never celebrated this “Easter” therefore it has duly been tagged “pagan” since neither Jesus nor the REAL apostles instituted this celebration. The only event Jesus commanded his disciples and that which his disciples dutifully observed on the appointed day was the “Last Supper”/“Lord’s Evening Meal”. Luke 22:18-20, 1Corinthians 11:26
Again, no mention of any such “Easter” amongst the recognized celebrations of the early Christian congregation.

As for complaints about my usage of "even if," my point by using that phrase is that even if one accepts the initial assertions, they don't logically lead into the conclusions. So, for example, when I say "But even if they [rabbits] were symbols of fertility, it means nothing for their usage in Easter, because the Easter rabbit is a relatively recent invention." And this is very true. The first mention I can find of the Easter Bunny is a 17th century book named "Disputatione ordinaria disquirens de ovis paschalibus" (in my original post, I incorrectly wrote 16th century--though 17th century just makes my point stronger). If the Easter Bunny is of some kind of ancient pagan origin, then why is it that it's completely unknown in Easter celebrations prior to the 17th century? I mean, heck, even in today's world there are many countries where the Easter Bunny is basically a nonentity in Easter celebrations.
For the record, I actually dislike usage of the Easter bunny, as I believe it detracts from the actual purpose of the Easter celebration (the Resurrection). However, it provides no proof of any kind of pagan origin of Easter.

I saw what you did in your previous comments. Talmabout “Easter being a spin-off from the Passover”—that’s such a weak stance my man.

FYI, the Greek word πάσχα(pascha) DOES NOT translate to “Easter” as the KJV would have it. I mean you can even look up and play around the individual Greek letters of πάσχα and see if they transliterate to “Easter”.
That’s why you think it’s some continuance but we all know the KJV is filled with a lot of errors.

That said, πάσχα(pascha) in the original Greek translates ONLY to the “Passover”(John 13:1) which the early Christian congregation did not even observe after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ because the “Lord’s Evening Meal” had replaced it. Romans 10:4

eomajeh:
Somehow this post on "birthday celebration" veered into a discussion of Michael the archangel.
The JWs in the house think they have given strong biblical proofs to support their claim that michael the archangel is jesus.
Well, what does the atheist me know about such discussions.
I can only say that JWs have given michael the archangel different identities since they started.
Number 1
first they said michael the archangel was definitely not jesus, but simply an angel who even worshiped jesus.
This they stated in their journal, Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4.
Of course, they quoted scripture to support this claim, including Heb 1:6 which says in part "Let all the angels of God worship him". In their arguments they said, all the angels that were commanded to worship jesus included the archangel, so the archangel cannot be jesus.
Number 2
Not long after, they swift gears, and said michael the archangel is the pope. their arguments can be found in Zion's Watch Tower 1879 December p.6
Number 3
They switched gears again not long after, and said michal was the pre-human jesus
first it was a cautious. with statements like: Can it be that he [/b]who was called Michael--Jehovah's chief-messenger--was none other than our Lord in his pre-human condition? we conclude that [b]HE must have been "chief messenger."
For their supposedly scriptural backing for this new claim, see Zion's Watch Tower 1883 June p.3
Number 4
Not long after, they did a reverse. the archangel now went back to being the pope. This is stated in their book: The Finished Mystery 1917 p.188
Number 5
Then they moved again, and said michael the archangel is the heavenly name of jesus. This new view was first taught in their journal Watchtower 1984 December 15 p.26. this view the have maintained.
So when JW fling out verses of the bible as scriptural proofs for their "michael the archangel is jesus" argument, they sincerely feel they are correct, and they wonder why other people cannot see those verses as the JWs see them.
They forget (or choose to ignore) that they also flung out bible verses as scriptural evidence when they were teaching that michael the archangel is "the pope", and "just an angel that is not jesus", etc.
Using what i call "bible gymnastics", and clever interpretations, desired explanations can be squeezed from almost any Scripture.



Yes, the JW can come out tommorow saying michael the archangel is Buhari, and bible verses can be flung out as scriptural evidence.


what do i know! i am just a senseless atheist

All I can see up there is nothing but a desperate attempt in attacking a lifeless strawman. What you failed to realize is that none of Jehovah’s Witnesses will impose their teachings on anyone. Matthew 10:14
The only thing they will do is defend their faith which is in line with 1Peter 3:15 but to say that “By force, by fire you must accept” is not permitted since we recognize that everyone has a choice to make. Joshua 24:15

The Sabbath Day(different from the Sabbath Year) is a day God set aside for the descendants of Abraham i.e. the Israelites to rest from their normal daily activities and routines(Exodus 31:12-17) and pay utmost attention to spiritual matters such as reading and meditating on the Law. Deuteronomy 6:5-7, Joshua 1:8
This was done because God rested from this creative works after the sixth “day”( “day” here implying an unspecified period of time). Genesis 2:2
The Israelites were to treat the Sabbath Day as sacred and holy(Deuteronomy 5:12-14) because anyone who showed contempt for that Day was to be put to death. Numbers 15:32-36

Notwithstanding the Sabbath Day observance was only for the Israelites right up to the time of Jesus who were under the old covenant. Exodus 19:5
But when Jesus instituted a new covenant(Jeremiah 31:31-34, Luke 22:28-30) and sealed that covenant with his death on an upright stake/pole, the Sabbath Day and all the other practices under the old covenant ceased to have any religious significance before God that’s why Paul was inspired by God’s holy spirit to write that we are no longer under the obligation to keep the Sabbath. Colossians 2:13-16

RandomGuy48: The link goes to the Jehovah's Witness website. So let's take a look at some of the claims in that link...
Those who link it to Astarte are doing so on nothing more than their imaginations. It being named after the goddess Eostre may be possible, given Bede's reference, but Bede appears to actually be saying that Easter was named after the Anglo-Saxon name for April (Eosturmonab), which was named after Eostre. However, there's a problem in that outside of Bede, there is no mention of this goddess anywhere; this has led some to wonder if Bede's information may have been mistaken.
But even if Bede was correct, the word for Easter in most languages it not Easter or anything like it. Before the word "Easter" ever existed, it was referred to as pascha in Greek and Latin, and most languages take their name for the holiday from that. For example, in Spanish the word is Pascua. To try to find some pagan connection for a holiday because one language may have named it after a pagan deity centuries after the holiday was already celebrated is obviously absurd.Even this quote they provide doesn't actually say there is a link between pagan usage of rabbits and the Easter bunny. But even if they were symbols of fertility, it means nothing for their usage in Easter, because the Easter rabbit is a relatively recent invention. It was first invented in the 16th century by German Protestants (the first written reference have to is . The idea that an innovation that late somehow proves an ancient pagan connection when prior to that there was no rabbit association with Easter is obviously incorrect, even if the false idea it is linked to paganism is unfortunately frequently repeated.
Eggs appear to have been first associated with Easter around the 11th century. While earlier than the Easter rabbit, this is nevertheless too late to be a vestige of a fertility rite. Their popularity seems to have come about because during Lent (the fast prior to Easter) people weren't supposed to eat eggs, but hens kept laying them so people took to doing stuff with the eggs.
There is no Scandinavian goddess named Eastre. Maybe this is referring to the Eostre mentioned above, but Eostre (if she was even real at all) wasn't Scandinavian and there is no proof that the above claim was true for her.
So I actually looked at this work. This is what it says on page 105:
"Sunrise services are not unrelated to the Easter fires held on the tops of mountains in continuation of the New Year fires, a worldwide observance in antiquity. Rites were performed at the vernal equinox welcoming the sun and its great power to bring new life to all growing things."
No source is cited for this claim in the work. But accepting it as true regardless, it falls short of the claim made, as no mention is made of "sun worshippers."
So the article appears to be, as they say, fake news.

RandomGuy48: Unfortunately, the article linked has a number of inaccuracies. It's not the worst in this area as it at least qualifies some of its errors as being possibilities, but nevertheless it's misleading. Let's look at some of its claims.
First, it tries to suggest a link between pagan spring equinox celebrations and Easter. This makes little sense. Not only is Easter not ever on the spring equinox, Easter a Christian continuance of the Jewish Passover (the words for Easter and Passover are even the same in some languages!). Trying to find some connection between its timing and pagan celebrations simply makes little sense when the obvious answer is that its timing comes from Passover.
I am glad the article correctly notes that in most countries, the name for Easter comes from Passover (e.g. Pascha, Pasqua, Paaske, Paques). Now, it mentions that the English word Easter, at least according to an 8th century writer named Bede, comes from a pagan goddess named Eostre. This is certainly a possibility, though I should note that the name, more properly, appears to come from the month of Eosturmonab (April in their calendar), which was named after Eostre, giving even less of a connection. And that's even assuming it's correct. Outside of Bede's mention here, there's no direct proof that this Eostre ever existed to begin with. And even if it is true, this is a name that emerged well after the celebration was already being done in other countries under the name of pascha.
More problematic is its statement that "In Germany the festival is called Ostern, and the goddess is called Ostara." As far as I can tell, there is no mention of Ostara in the historical record at all, and Ostara being an alternate name for Eostre was a speculation by Jacob Grimm in the 19th century.
Despite its implication of Easter eggs being traced back to paganism, Easter eggs emerged later on in the middle ages, too late for there to be a plausible pagan connection.
On the rabbits, the article talks somewhat out of both sides of its mouth. It claims "Rabbits and hares are also associated with fertility and were symbols linked to the goddess Eostre" (which is naught more than a speculation--as noted, we have only one source for the existence of Eostre, which says nothing about her being associated with rabbits). But then it admits that the first mention of the Easter rabbit is in a book from 1722! Even if Eostre did have a connection to rabbits, it would be simple coincidence that they became associated with Easter because the Easter rabbit first appeared so late in history.
So the article really doesn't back up its promise of linking Easter to earlier pagan ceremonies.

There are a number of biased articles written by Constantine “apologetics” who would try to paint him as a kind, peace-loving individual when in reality the accurate history books point to him being the vicious, pagan warmonger that he really was. For a pagan to have that much authority over the congregation and even decide what celebrations and teachings should be accepted is already out of the question because it was evident that God’s holy spirit was not working with him. Apparently, his merging the State with the so-called “Christian” religion at that time has already invalidated whatever he and his companions were trying to accomplish during the 4th century concerning “Christianity” since the main founder of Christianity implored his disciples never to get involved with political affairs talk less of merging it with their religion. John 17:14-16 compare Revelation 17:2

His involvement with gruesome wars/conflicts/battles and the constant execution/persecution of “heretics”(people who disagreed with his school of thought) also disqualifies from being a true Christian since an important principle given by Jesus at Matthew 26:52 was ignored. So how can the institution of this so-called “Easter” celebration have any significance before God if the Constantine in question was not acting according to the principles found in the Scriptures?

Remember that the authentic history books have it recorded that Constantine was an ardent pagan who brought teachings that had nothing to do with Jesus Christ and the latter even foretelling that such a corruption of truth would come after the death of the main apostles in the first century. Matthew 13:24-30 compare Acts 20:29-30, 2Peter 2:1, 2Thessalonians 2:3-12, 1Timothy 4:1
So whatever Constantine and his group tried to do had no significance before God since they didn’t even have a proper zeal for God and were actually the ones trying to set the standards for God instead of subjecting to God’s own standards. Romans 10:3

P.S. Your use of the subordinate conjunction “Even if” is rather prevalent in your comments which means that you know there are truths in the articles you read but still want to turn a blind eye to it by passing it off as just a bundle of information that you do not desire should change your thinking.

*

ogtechinc:
This is be very strong.... I believe you are saying it should not be celebrated.

According to Jesus’ half brother, “if someone knows how to do what is right and yet does not do it, it is a sin for him” James 4:17
Already, so many people are in this category who turn a blind eye even after they are familiar with the truth of many things.