₦airaland Forum

Jozzy4:
Speaking regarding his ministry in the Asian province . he talked about how he preached repentance to God and Faith in Jesus Christ .

This is not something to be taught a believer, because he already has faith in Jesus Christ . clearly he was referring to the time they were unbelievers and he did the preaching by teaching publicly and from HOUSE to HOUSE .

Yes he spoke of teaching people about repentance when he first entered Asia Minor. But the preceding Bible verses make it clear that Ephesus was not the first city he visited in Asia Minor and that there were already believers in Ephesus before he ever set foot there.

Jozzy4:
It simply means don't accuse NWT of deception when you don't have the facts .

Another of your FALSE assertion which stem out of your hatred was ONLY NWT contained the God is your throne rendering ., which as stated was found to be an outright LIE .

I Demand an apology for your making such deceptive Assertion to mislead the Public !!!

Until you do, I won't proceed with you because doing so will mean you can continue to slander without remorse .



Can you be the same with YOUR GOD ?

Where is your reasoning ability given to you by God Sir ., no insult intended just baffling how a clear statement can be misrepresented

Verse 9 says he has a GOD .

Anyone who is Your God has authority over you. No wonder Jesus is said to be under the authority of his God . ( 1 Cor 11:3)

Also, even going by the other rendering, The Father also called human Gods as well ... Yet doesn't mean they are Almighty .

Christ is not the Almighty, he is subjected to the authority of someone Greater than him . HIS GOD!!!




Scripture said it clearly that Jesus is NOT the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob . that simply dismiss your write up as lacking credentials .

Act 3:13 Jesus is a servant of God of Abraham , Isaacb and Jacob

You are still treating verses in isolation of the entire Bible. What you referenced above was Peter's speech to Jewish unbelievers who were yet to accept Jesus. When trying to convert an unbeliever you don't start with the deepest and most complex parts of the message but with the simplest and less controversial ones. It is after you have won him over and he his faith is firmly rooted that you go deep.
You go from the known to the unknown.
When Paul arrived Athens and introduced the unknown god inscribed on the wall of the temple as the Almighty God, does it mean that those Athenians actually perceived that unknown god as the God of heaven? Never! To them it meant just another one of their usual gods whose existence they believed they might not be aware of.
Also, Jesus was of dual nature, namely; as an earthly being in the flesh and as a spirit being in heaven. In Hebrews 1:8-9, the scene happened in heaven and He was therefore spoken of as a Spirit/God and not as a fleshy being.
But in the Acts 3:13 you have just cited, Peter was referring to him concerning his activities on earth as a man in the flesh, hence he referred to him as a servant which is an earthly thing.
Also in the 1 Cor 1:13 you cited, Paul was speaking to them in the earthly sense hence his presentation of the hierarchy. The evidence that the reference was earthly is the fact that he was speaking about Church and matrimonial home hierarchies. Remember there will be neither marriage nor Church in heaven.

Yes the NWT alone shifted the position of "is" in their translation of the second rendering. So I have not reversed myself.
Does the NWT indicate in any footnote that the verse has two renderings?
That is the distortion.
Is the NWT the same as the LXX Septuagint which you referenced as evidence of existence of two renderings of the verse?
So what is this apology you are demanding as if you are God?

Jozzy4:
Beautiful, He never said I and my Father are one God .

John 17:21 he prayed his disciples be ONE just as he and his father are one .

" Just as " ... Can u see that ?

Now if you take it to mean being one as God , then his disciples are also Gods as well, because they will be one JUST AS.

But in the preceding verses Christ made it clear that He and the Father were one before creation of the world. But did not however say that he and the disciples were one before creation. See where the difference lies?

OlaoChi:
Most Akoko Edos identify as Edo state indegene not Edo ethnicity

But from what you can see right here, most of the Akoko-Edos that have spoken have identified themselves not just as Edo State indigens but as Edoids and breakaway migrants from the Bini Kingdom who have undergone a lot of cultural evolution and language divergence from Bini.
Why keep trying to speak for a people who are speaking for themselves? Is that not an evidence of a malicious intention?

Jozzy4:
Sorry, but you sound uninformed with the above , Even the LXX Septuagint admits two renderings for the above verse, I gave the example of RSV to buttress that fact . Many others also include it in their footnote because its not wrong to render it " God is your throne " .

Like I said earlier, it doesn't prove anything since verse 9 proves Jesus is not supreme .



LIKE I said earlier, you also sound informed here ... Check the below Translations

An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed), renders it: “God is your throne....”


And The Bible in Living English (Byington) reads: “God is your throne....”

The Message reads: “Your throne is God’s throne….”

NSB - God is your throne

Mace - "God is thy throne….”

Twentieth Century Translation - ‘God is thy throne….’


Will you now make a PUBLIC APOLOGY for misleading the public and misrepresenting the witnesses with your bolded words ?



An angel also identified himself as " I am " to Manoah and wife ... Going by your logic, that angel is Yahweh ?

@ Bold When Yahweh introduced himself to Moses , He made mention that he is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob ... Please back up your claim of Jesus is claiming I am , by telling us if Jesus is THE GOD OF ABRAHAM , ISAAC and JACOB as specifically told Moses ?

You sound confused about these things.

If some translations have it as "Your throne O God" and others have it as "God is your throne", and both renderings are contained in the LXX Septuagint, then how does one rendering invalidate the other?
Jesus called Himself both the Son of God and the Son of Man under different circumstances. How does His being the Son of Man invalidate His being the Son of God?
Had it been the LXX Septuagint does not at all contain the "Your throne, O God" rendering, then you would have had a point.

Verse 9 says, ".... Therefore God, your God has set you above.......". If the Bible itself calls Jesus God and according to your understanding that doesn't make Jesus supreme, then why do JWs fret and fume when other Christians call him God despite knowing fully well that they actually saw it in the Bible?
Jesus said, "Listen O Israel, the Lord your God is one God......" Now God says, "God, your God has set you above....". Harmonizing these two we can see that Jesus and God are actually one and the same.

If God Himself is someone's throne, then who else could that person be except God?
Jesus and God are one and the same. They share the exalted name "God" which no one else is permitted to share.
According to the logic you apply to explain verse 9; Jesus and God are both Gods but with God being supreme over Jesus - meaning there are two Gods between whom one is supreme and the other is subordinate.
However, you are wrong because if God and Jesus are both Gods and there are NOT two Gods in existence according to the same Bible, then that logically means Jesus and God are one and the same. That explains why it is called a mystery. Put in another way, Jesus and God are integral fractions of a whole but single entity called God. Without Jesus God is incomplete.
The bottom line which other Christians establish is that God Himself calls Jesus God hence they too are free to call Jesus God. Hence when they say Jesus is God, they are just echoing Heb 1:8-9 for whatever it means. Unfortunately this is what JWs miss.

Jesus deliberately used "I am" against a grammatical context for which such usage was contrary. He used present tense instead of past tense or past perfect. He deliberately disobeyed the rule concordance of tenses because he wanted to prove a point.
But in the case of Manor, the angel used "I am" in contextual concordance with the mood of the conversation.
Had the angel to disobeyed the rule of concordance of tenses in his reply, then you would have had a basis for comparison.
Look at it:

Manor: Are you the one who came yesterday?
Angel: Yes I am. (harmony of tenses)

Jews: How old are you to have seen Abraham?
Jesus: Before Abraham was born, I am (instead of I was or I had been) - deliberately chosen disharmony of tenses to prove a point.
The angel was not trying to prove any extraordinary point, so he answered "I am" i.e. "I am the one" or as everyone would ordinarily do if asked "Who are you?" or "Are you the one who I was told came yesterday?" The angel's response simply means "Yes it is me" in the context of the conversation.
But Jesus' use of "I am" in response to inquiry by the Jews doesn't not mean "It is me" in the context of their conversation.
Let's put "it is me" in place of "I am" and see whether it makes sense at all:

Jews: How old are you to have seen Abraham?

Jesus: Before Abraham was born It is me.

Does this make any sense at all and does it answer the question asked?
The issue between Manor and the angel is totally unrelated to the one between Jesus and the Jews here. So there is no basis for comparison.
Jesus could have gone further into telling them he was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob but because their hearts were hardened already, he refrained.
Just for the mere use of "I am" they picked up stones. How could he have gone further.
Even if Jesus had made mention of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; you would have, in your doubt, demanded further confirmatory utterances.

Remember Jesus was not particularly out to convince His doubters but to ground the faith of those who accept Him even without having fully understood Him yet.

Jozzy4:
I hope you remember he said " from the very first day I stepped into the province of Asia ( not just Ephesus ) ... I did not hold from telling you any of the things that were profitable nor from teaching you publicly and from house to house . But I thoroughly bore witness both to Jews and to Greeks about repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus "

He preached to them as unbelievers using those method's ( house to house and public teaching ) , if they are ; repentance toward God and faith in Lord Jesus won't be mentioned.

A believer already has faith in Lord Jesus , But here they are been preached to , to have faith in Lord Jesus showing they ain't yet believers at the time .

So Ephesus alone was equivalent to the whole of Asia province?
Entering Ephesus can't mean exactly the same as entering Asia Minor.
When a generalization is made there are exceptions.
Chapter 19 vs 1-8 show clearly that he did not do house to house preaching immediately on arrival in Ephesus.
It is like a tourist visiting Nigeria for the first time Lands in Lagos as his point of entry and starts visiting museums first, then he proceeds to Benin and visited Museums first again, and same thing with PH, Kano and Kaduna before proceeding to Abuja where he however visited Unibuja first on arrival. Then when telling of his experience he says, "When I first got to Nigeria I visited Museums first". He is correct here because he is apparently referring to Lagos. By this statement he couldn't have been referring to Abuja because in Abuja he didn't visit a museum first. This is simple logic.

Moreover, the first city Paul visited in Asia Minor was not Ephesus.

Jozzy4:
Many became believers including those Elders through the ministry of Apostle Paul .

Act 20:25 " now look! I know that none of you among whom I PREACHED the Kingdom will ever see my face again "

Clearly Paul was referring to their past, He said he was the one who preached to them ... How did he do this ? Verse 20 answers .. Teaching you publicly and from house to house .

But chapter 19 vs 1-8 tell us clearly that it wasn't Paul that converted all of them. Paul was talking about how he preached to them and not how he converted them. An already existing convert could still be preached to for the purpose of strengthening his faith. Paul was lettered enough to know the exact differences between merely preaching to people and converting them. Where he did the conversion he did not hesitate to say it in other books.

Jozzy4:
The construction of this verse allows for two renderings . RSV footnote says " or God is thy throne " .

I just don't understand the point you are driving at, But I can assure you it doesn't prove the trinity since verse 9 says Jesus has a God .

Proving Jesus isn't Supreme .

I recall that JWs discredit translators of RSV for allegedly making an addition to a verse in the Bible with the aim of giving false credence to Trinity. That you reference the same RSV to defend your anti-trinity stance is quite curious.
However, only in your NWT is Heb. 1:8 deliberately distorted to suit a preconceived doctrine.
All other translations have it as "...... your kingdom, O God......."

In John 8:58, Jesus declared, "before Abraham was born, I am". Normally Jesus' use of "I am" was grammatically wrong as it should have been "before Abraham was born I was" or "before Abraham was born I had been". However he deliberately chose "I am" to imply that he is the very I AM THAT I AM whom Moses met in Mount Horeb while tending his father in-law's sheep, and the Jews there got the message and therefore saw it as blasphemous of equating himself with God due to their lack of understanding similar to that displayed by JWs today, and then they picked up stones to cast on him.

Jozzy4:
Don't forget those Elders have a past , a time when they are just Newly converted to Christianity ...

Paul was reminding them of their past by saying " You well know how I conducted myself among you from THE FIRST DAY I stepped into the province of Asia " - Act 20:18

When Paul stepped into Asia , his ministry there was recorded in Act 19:10 . He was simply reminding them of how he spoke to them then , which is through public teaching and from house to house - Act 20:20

Which resulted in their repentance - Act 20:21

If you go back to Acts 19:1-8, you'll see that the first time ever that Paul entered Ephesus, he immediately met some already existing believers who were 12 in number and he baptized them with the Holy Spirit.
This means there were already believers in Ephesus among whom those future elders were.
After baptizing those 12 Paul proceeded straight not to anyone's house but to the synagogue where he stayed for 3 months delivering his teachings with people coming to listen to him there including the would be church elders whom he would later identify and visit at home for having already becoming believers prior to his arrival in Ephesus.

Tolax17:
Bro, I never for ones toldyou i am a witness. If I were one what is the big deal anyway.
Ur comment shows you are not ready to reason logically, but here to attack. Maybe you're pastor sef.
It's doesn't matter. Live your life, Work for your salvation and leave the rest to God.

Like I said, I am halting here. No more comments from me. You can't stop me from associating with who I like. Not a single word from your write up as moved me. If 1+1=2 not everyone will see it as 2. Some will justify themselves and say its 1.
Different things for different folks.

We are different, we see it different. It's
But I haven't gain anything from your write up though. Not a single word as moved me.

Neither did I too get anything from you. You may really not be a JW but then it is wrong of you to have all listened to and swallowed all their attacks on other Christians and rushing into conclusion that these other Christians are evil without ever having heard their own response. Now you are hearing it today amidst the glaring fact that the JWs themselves have melted away for lack of superior logical response woven around the very scriptures they made you believe formed the basis for their initial attacks on other Christians.
They made you believe that other Christians, including your very self, are bad, evil, support violence, support adultery, support conflicts, etc, yet they turn around to ask you to contribute to the growth of their ministry through donations towards their magazines from the moneys they supposedly made from these alleged vices; yet you got convinced they actually are better than others whereas the Jesus they claim to preach never accepted financial assistance from unbelievers and those He condemned as wicked and hypocritic followers of the word of God.
They call other Christians hypocrites but keep asking them for financial support. How come it never occurred to you that such is s higher degree of hypocrisy?

Tolax17:
I laugh in swahilli. I backing out here. I only wish to express my quota, the the fact remains, jehovah witnesses a far better in many ways.

Let's even hypothetically agree with you that JWs are better.
But since when did it become a matter of who is better than the other? Is it not a matter of strictly fulfilling the set of fixed requirements? A person who scores 30℅ in an exam is better than another who scores 29℅, but does that mean the scorer of 30℅ met the minimum marks for credit? However, JWs are even worse than others. Even Jesus asked others to appraise Him and never did it Himself. Appraising yourself and giving yourself pass mark is a thing of the carnal minded world which no genuine Christian individual or group should emulate. It is simply an attitude from the devil.

Tolax17:
I have made inquiry, studied, research through the bible, I haven't seen anything wrong in all you say. I have travelled across the continents
Nothing wrong with their pattern of medical care such as blood transfusion. It's the best. Go to Britain, UK, Sweden, bloodless surgeries is the best. Many people are even adopting bloodless surgeries. Nigeria is backward in everything, nothing works here. The medical care and facilities are archaic. I have come across several doctors here in nigeria not jehovah witnesses who practices bloodless surgeries. They will even tell you right on time.

A research conducted with a biased and closed mind must surely yield predetermined results hence your research carried out with a JW mindset could not have furnished you with findings other than above. Biologically speaking,
Meat becomes white when blood is 100℅ drained from it.
However, after buying red meat from the market and eating it you are here claiming your organization forbids blood and blood products. I laugh in Swahili too.
It is just like some Christians who claim the Bible forbids alcohol but forget that alcohol is constantly released into their systems during cellular respiration through glycolysis and Krebs Cycle.
The biblical directive against blood is not meant to be literal in application.

Tolax17:
[b]Nothing wrong with Armageddon, it's in the bible. It's the war of a God almighty. Armageddon is synonymous to mountain of meggido (Hebrew). Where literal wars were fought. Since War of Almighty God is not only against wicked humans but also demons even Satan, Armageddon is fitting- meaning total destruction of all opposers.
Whereas, is different from the malicious lies of hellfire and heaven. Even king Solomon who was blessed with wisdom, knowledge, fame, power, material possession etc. even compared animals life cycle to that of humans, eventually concluding what befall animals happen to human (Eccles 3:18,19) no superiority over animals. All dies, all comes from the dust n return to the dust. In contracts to false teaching that man dies, the he faces eternal punishment or go to heaven to be singing n enjoyin life, building mansion. Yet the bible speaks of resurrection. If they are being punished or building mansion and partying or enjoying in heaven, what's the purpose of resurrection?[/b]

The contents ofJesus's parables were a reflection of both earthly and eternal realities. His parable of a rich man who celebrated his son's wedding in his own house was a reflection of the earthly reality that Jews of that era celebrated weddings in the groom's father's houses and not in the their places of worship unlike today. So also the cry of the rich man for just a drop of water to relieve him of dehydration and extreme heat in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is a reflection of the reality of hell fire. Don't be deceived!
As per resurrection; it will happen before the final judgement. Neither Jesus nor Elijah would have been able to raise the dead had they already gone to heaven or hell.
The whole of Ecclesiastes is a documentation of the random thoughts about the incomprehensibility of nature by a man who had fallen deep into sin thus was spiritually distanced from God. That such book found its way into the Bible does not confer any reliability on it as an authority on spiritual truths. Rather it is just an indication that the Christian faith is broad enough to accommodate every shade of opinion with the ultimate objective of redirecting all towards the truth.
In chapter 9 vs 1 to 3, King Solomon also concluded that both the righteous and wicked share the same fate. If we are to take that as valid, then neither you nor me would have been striving to live a life pleasing to God. Did Jesus the author and finisher of the faith teach that the same destiny awaits the righteous and wicked alike?
The contents of the verse you referenced above were a question and not an authoritative assertion. Like I have been saying, if you had not taken that verse in isolation but read it in the context of the entire theme of the book and the Bible you would have avoided the contradiction which Chapter 9 vs 1-3 presents to kill off your argument.

Tolax17:
Before you were born, were you the one that chose where to be born or to be born in nigeria?
Certainly not.God did the selection.Jehovah witnesses practice n follow bible teaching. No dispute about that.

No one judges himself wrong. Even the devil claims righteousness. Let the world rather judge you. Christians were so adjudged by mere observers in Antioch and not by themselves.

Tolax17:
Anyone among them that remain faithful to the end God will pick from them (God sees the heart, no human does- the heart is evil and treacherous, who can see it?- God). Among non-JW, anyone that obey God's commandment and keep it faithfully to the end n merit God's approval, he will picks them. Pagans who never had the privilege but there heart is clean God's will pick them. Even, Lydia the prostitute in the bible was saved because of her faith. She was a sinner in the beginning but her faith saved her in the end.

Even I too have read it in Romans that pagans without privilege of hearing the word but having a pure heart will be saved. Why then does your organization therefore insists that only membership of it qualifies people for salvation? If you were open minded, are these not supposed to be biblical evidences that the race is personal and that there is actually nothing like God's approved organization in the real physical sense? See what indoctrination can lead to?

Tolax17:
God's see beyond the physical eye.that's y the bible say there will be a resurrection of both the righteous n unrighteousn. Even resurrection of the wicked for judgment. (Act 5:24,25).When you move with good people there is every probability that they would exact good influence on you. If you move with bad ones they can also influence you negatively. If you move with intelligent friends you might see yourself as intelligent or potential intelligent person.

A spiritual man can't be corrupted by the company he keeps. Jesus moved with the best and worst of persons but was not influenced. He remains the example for all Christians. Only Pharisees and the teachers of the law believe that company can corrupt. And that is the philosophy you seem to share here.

Tolax17:
Same can be applied to jehovah witnesses. They strive hard in this crooked world to please their God jehovah and everyone who associate with them strictly to imitate jehovah, keeps is commandment n live a life well pleasing to him.
Hence
, they always see themselves as servants of God who will inherit/ live in God's Kingdom. In the mist of so many self acclaimed Christians
who claimed (Christendom -a term used for false christians who deviated from God's laws even welcome amoral practices such as: fornication, adultery, idolatry, given head blowjobs, supporting conflict, violence wars corruption extortion, homo n bisexuality etc even common among pastors, most reverend, most holy etcs) but claiming to be God servants etc. But when they are exposed they claiming we shouldn't forgets they're humans too like us.

JW pastors, or whatever they call themselves, have been reported to have had sex with minors. When their pastors commit these sins they are quickly transfered and the matter is buried. JWs do fornicate and impregnate one another outside wedlock. Instances abound and I therefore don't know how you could be so judgemental on other Christians. According to you, non-JW members (i.e part of Christendom) who are pure will be saved. Shouldn't that rather been instructive to you that you are now contradicting yourself by your sweeping generalizations above?
If some among other Christians are pure, then what is the difference between them and JWs among whom there are equally good and bad ones?
I have seen very dishonest and money loving JWs. They lie in the office to get permission to attend midweek meeting. The other Christians don't go around pretending to be righteouss but JWs pretend to be. Who do you think God loves more between the sinful man who died not deny his weakness and the sinful man who outwardly pretends to be righteous?
As for supporting conflicts, I don't see any genuine Christians that have ever supported conflicts, violence, extortion, bisexuality, etc. That such happen is in fulfilment of the prophesy that wolves will come among sheep and that tares will be sown among wheat in the vineyard of God. Even in the first churches cases of adultery and homosexually were reported to Paul about the church in Corinth. Did that therefore make the Corinthian church an apostate Church worshipping a false God? How can sensible persons use the activities of a sinful few church members to judge all the rest when the Bible makes it clear that the race is strictly personal? Will God judge by denomination or by individual?
In fact any Christian group which the devil is not targeting to sow weeds and tares among needs to go and re-examine itself as to whether they are really a spiritual threat to the devil's kingdom. If the devil is not attacking you then you are one and the same with him.


Ever in the scriptures, the Apostles didn do that . Apostle Peter and Paul had a disagreement in the scriptures, when corrected by Paul, he never justify himself in the bible.

Unfortunately, a lot of errors on the path of JWs have been exposed and expressed here with none of you being able to prove them wrong with the scriptures, yet you have continued to justify them. Isn't it hypocritic that the above is coming from the same you?


[quote author=Tolax17 post=65027812][b[I also realize you're here to look at flaws of jehovah witnesses, then you capitaliseon it and use it againSt them..[/b]

But I thought you just commended Peter for accepting when Paul pointed out his fault? How come the same you are now condemning others for looking for your flaws and pointing same out to you? What an interesting demonstration of crass hypocrisy!
So you even agree you have faults and yet you went all the way to accuse other churches of different faults? Haven't you read where Jesus made it clear that no sin is greater than another? You people are just clowns, honestly!

Tolax17:
If you wanna grow n acquire knowledge n stop looking for mistake where there's non acquire Info, you overlook is spoken English n focus on what he has for. The info you need, you hold it dear 5o you, those you don't need you simply discard it.

So how much do you people want to grow by looking for mistakes among other Christians when yourselves are more deeply swimming in same? How much have you been able to hold on to the sides that appear good to you about other Christians and discard the sides which appear to you as bad? And now that they've made succinct clarifications on those sides you think are bad, how much have you been able to accept them or prove them wrong rather than accuse them of hatred and malice against you who have not been able to answer your own questions?

Tolax17:
[b]I am not a perfect man, sinner not here to look at flaws or support anybody but to express my Quota.
Good day

Your organization's attitude and rules for you conflicts with this.
Good day too.

Emmanystone:
You know, you just raised a very valid point here. I'm beginning to see that these people wail over persecution trying to convince the ignorant that it is so because they are the real Christians. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, l laugh in higher case.
They have no miracles to show the power of God in theie midst, hence, the persecution. I see.

The second point is so true. They wait for Christiandom to go to war with savage angry tribes and win, before they come in with their bags and umbrellas knocking on doors. Satan can not fight satan.

1 Cor. 4:20 says "the kingdom of God is not about talk talk talk (repetitional emphasis mine) but about power."

Ironically our JW brothers focus more on talking and actually attempt to have their way by talking other Christians down, and when they do so they insinuate that why other Christians don't reply them is because their talk is the unchangeable truth whereas the other Christians' reason for not dignifying them with a response is simply because of this verse.
But with the very little response some of us the other Christians have given them on this thread alone, they are already shiting and urinating in their pants and crying of persecution and campaign of calumny against their organization.
I hope with their experience on this thread they'll understand that Christianity is more about manifestation of the power of God than empty self glorification talks and sharing propaganda magazines from street to street and house to house.

Jozzy4:
Stop the ignorant talk, aren't his disciples also " One " ?

Tell us if it means John is same as Peter .

Christ didn't say I and my Father are " one God " . he said " One" ... Read your Bible!

Please what do you have to say about Hebrews 1:8 King James Version (KJV)
"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."

Or was this verse not in the original text as usual?

switnpea:
You just didn't make any point at all. Just speaking English that's all I see.

If you're sincere honest-hearted surely Jehovah will draw you to His organization. I didn't mince words!!!

Until then.

Like I said, I don't have time for unnecessary arguments.

You have still not addressed the issues raised.
So it is Jehovah that now draws people to your organization and no longer the superior logical arguments you initially claimed was the attraction?

switnpea:
It takes humility to understand Gods word. Proud people does not have that quality. If you're humble enough you will know that. Like I said I don't have time for debates it's childish. If you're sincere enough you will understand Gods word. Until then....
For now I don't have time for argument



Peace bro

In all my encounters with JWs the premise they themselves set before engaging me and everyone else is that any genuine seeker of the truth about Christ must discard every primordial sentiment, doctrinal background and cultural beliefs and rely solely on the Bible for direction. And that in any debate, only beliefs founded on logic woven around biblical facts should carry the day irrespective of our background denominational leanings and sentiments.

But your utterance above in response to the opinion I have established here based entirely on biblical references is a violation of the very conditions which your organization sets for validity of beliefs.
You couldn't have been telling me all this while that it must be by logic of biblical facts and now that you appear to be losing it on that very rule you set, you start shifting the goal post to 'being sincere enough'. Where did you keep the role of 'sincerity' when you were hammering on facts and logic as the sole determinant?
And I am yet to know what exactly you mean by sincerely anyway.

Jozzy4:
@red, I guess the apostles disobey Jesus Christ ? Act 20:20

First of all let me appreciate you for trying to counter me with the scriptures than with utterances inspired by sentiments, and attacks with name calling and other mundane insinuations founded on persecution complex. You have just shown example of how Christians should disagree over principles. And for that I regard you as a true follower of Christ irrespective of you being a JW.
You see, my argument here is that house to house visits recorded in the Bible happened only between fellow believers and not for fresh evangelism which involved a believer and yet to be converted unbelievers. If, you had not, like other JWs, treated Acts 20:20 in isolation but have read the entire Acts chapter 20, you would have realized that Paul was speaking to only the Elders of the Church in Ephesus when he declared in that verse that he visited them from house to house. And if you have actually followed this thread from page 0 you should have seen where one JW brought up the visit of Peter to Cornelius and I explained to him that Cornelius was already a believer hence Peter's visit to him in his house was not for fresh evangelism for which Jesus forbade house to house visit in Like 10:7. So also Paul's reference to visiting the Ephesus Church elders in their houses as contained in Acts 20:20 was not for fresh proselytization but to church elders who were already believers. Could church elders have been in need of being evangelized afresh?

Tolax17:
Bro,I am not here to argue or make destructive criticism. What I don't appreciate is that bro in question who continued to entertain your discussion.
You self read that act now. If for instance I am a witness n I come to your house to preach, if you entertain me I will stay. If you offer me water I might drink. If you don't accept me then I will continue from house to house looking for who will accept me (preaching ). The Bible at no time never say Christian can't not preach to Christian. So what's is the big deal . Ever malachi 3:16 says those in fear of the Lord spoke to each other and a book of remembrance was opened for those In fear of the Lord." So what's the ish.

You don't like them. It's not a must. Others like them it's not a big deal either. You can put it on your sign post no jehovah witnesses allowed here because their doctrines is not acceptable by you nobody cares.
I don't hate Catholic in person but I don't accept their religious believes. It's rooted in paganism of all kinds. Even Muslims criticise them. Their bible is even more than 66 books of the holy scripture.

Neither am I stopping you from continuing with you hatred for Catholics and love for JWs despite their obvious misinterpretations of the Bible as copiously pointed out here to them without them either accepting or bringing up superior arguments but attacking persons like you too have done.
Much as I am not a Catholic, I don't bother myself judging them. But what I observe about them is that their members are open minded and humble enough to bow to superior arguments supported with biblical citations. And I can boldly tell you that very many of them even disagree with some of their Church's doctrines but, like Paul the Apostle, would prefer to stay back and die correcting it than breaking away to found new denominations thereby further dividing the body of Christ, adding to the confusion plaguing Christianity and reinforcing the unbelievers perception that Christianity is a religion of confusion. The fact that they have the Catholic Charismatic wing aimed at causing some doctrinal reforms evidences their humility and acceptance of superior arguments from the outside world. On that note alone they earn my respect above JWs who when presented with superior arguments, arrogantly resort to name-calling and accusations of hatred and campaign against them while stubbornly refusing to answer the questions raised.
The attitude of my church towards superior scripture-based criticism is more or less like the Catholics'. Ordinary members are allowed to raise motions for the abolition of certain Church traditions and such motions scale through provided they can defend such convincingly with Bible citations and unassailable analysis. But for JW only a set of 8 elders in New York can. An ordinary member's opinion, however scripturally backed up, does not count. And such an organization appears to you as good and okay?

Your perception that Catholics' beliefs are rooted in paganism is part of the hatred planted in your heart against them by the JWs. If you had read my very first comment on this thread you would have realized that neither the JWs are actually free from practices rooted in paganism and that Moslems criticize them too. In fact I am shocked that you take criticism from moslems as a standard of measurement. Please which Christian group do moslems not criticize? Don't JWs conduct their weddings inside their religious houses? From evidences gleaned from the Bible, the Jews and early Christians conducted weddings in the house of the groom's father while pagans conducted weddings in their temples. Was the wedding at Cana which Jesus honoured with His first miracle conducted in the Temple? Originally, intramural system of education was a pagan traditional method aimed at mass training of soldiers in preparation for wars on short notice. It was much later extended to cover other professions like Medicine, Engineering, etc. But JWs with all their 'anti-paganism' attend today's intramural schools, bag certificates from them and use same to get jobs to fend for themselves. Why have they not abolished conducting their weddings inside their Kingdom Halls and advised their members to stop going to school?
Let me take you further a bit. The manner in which God sealed the covenant with Abraham in the land of Mesopotamia in Genesis by the light of His presence passing in between the halves of the sacrificed animals was exactly tailored after the Mesopotamians' culture of sealing covenants among themselves. Were ancient Mesopotamians Christians? Was it not in their land that Terah (Abraham's father) practiced idolatry so much that he even had personal idols which Abraham inherited and initially took along with him on the journey out of Ur?
Again the name "Zion" was given to the mountain by the original pagan inhabitants of that country whom God chased out for Israelites to stay. These pagans probably worshipped that mountain as a deity before then. But the name was retained by God who even later called it His throne on earth where He sits. God made every culture, tradition and physical feature but some were abused to worship the devil and Christians have the mandate to reverse this phenomenon and redirect everything towards the worship of the Living God. What therefore matters more is the intention behind any practice and not its origins. This is where JWs are wrong. Like I have said, Christians who fall for their doctrines are the types who had no deep personal knowledge of the scriptures before JWs came their way in life.

Emmanystone:
No be small. Dem still dey cry about their members that Hitler killed till today like say only dem Hitler killes.

Wait, these people are not expecting to be persecuted?

The way they cry and wail inconsolably about their experiences in prosecution leaves one wondering whether the apostles who rejoiced for being flogged by the Sanhedrin were different from the disciples whom Jesus forewarned of persecution and asked them to joyfully count it as spiritual gain.
And these people try everyday to convince others that they are the alpha and omega as regards scriptural knowledge and interpretation.
People are known by their fruits and not by their utterances.
Meanwhile who will cry for the unquantifiable persecution, physically and spiritually, endured by the Anglican and Catholic missionaries who on arrival had to contend against the powers of territorial deities and spirits that inhabited most parts of Africa coupled with physical resistance by savage native tribes?
Empty containers actually make the loudest noise.

mitchyy:
I'm not at your beck and call because I choose when to respond to you and how much time I spend doing so.

If this is how you speak with witnesses who visit you, I'm not shellshocked they stopped coming.

You are not asking questions to be informed. Be truthful to yourself. All I see is accusations, sarcasm and statements laced with untruth. Those who are asking to know, are not hard to spot.

You said we are being discouraged from engaging in personal study, which to me is the biggest boldfaced lie I've ever read here about us. My God!
When anyone who attends our meetings know how much we hammer on engaging in deep personal study? Bro, why? Do you have to go that far in your campaign against witnesses?
Those engaging you in discussions here are just wasting their time to be honest, me inclusive.

As for the first bolded, all my questions here are from the Bible's perspective evidenced by my backup with Bible citations. I did not ask you the questions from my personal sentiments. So if you accuse me of sarcacism, anti-JW campaign and untruths then you indirectly accuse the Bible of same.
And for that, I wish you well.

As per the second bolded; I made the assertion not from my own sentiments, but based on the confession of a JW member I once shared workplace office with. And for the fact that before then I had read in "Mankind's Search For God" a chapter in which it was categorically stated that JW alone is the denomination whose members speak in worldwide harmony on any issue hence solely fulfils the criterion for qualification as God's approved organization, I always took this my colleague's opinion on any issue as representative of JWs position worldwide.
I remember him telling me that a council of 8 New York elders are responsible for the authorship and adjustments of JW doctrines and literature. On asking him what happens if his own discoveries from deep personal studies reveal clearly that those 8 elders council in New York are actually in error as they too are mere humans after all, his response was that he is not allowed by the organization's doctrine to hold onto those discoveries or even air them out in fellowship meetings as he could start being perceived as weakening in faith.
What choice did I have other than to believe he was speaking the mind of every other JW member all over the world judging from that chapter I had earlier read from "Mankind's Search For God"? That is the danger of boasting about attaining a level you have not really attained.

Tolax17:
Bro, permit me to come inhere. The Bible is not against house to house preaching.
Read Acts 5:42. And every day, in the Temple and from house to house, they continued to teach and preach this message: "Jesus is the Messiah."
All I see in this thread is nothing but malice, hatred, jealous and ridicule for Jehovah witnesses. 'Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks'.

It's not a must you accept their teaching. If you continue to attack them, it won't stop them. They follow the bible strictly. Besides, if you think they're not doing enough or the method of teaching is not appropriate, or there are not preaching in some lands go there, preach there and device your and do your own thing.
'If you can't join them, then beat them'


He that thinks he's standing should be aware he does not fall.

The problem JWs have is the tendency to pick a verse and treat it in isolation of the rest parts of the Bible thereby giving interpretations that are out of context thus making the Bible appear incoherent to unbelievers.
With the way you have just quoted Acts 5:42 to defend your sentiments without taking cognizance of the already mentioned Luke 10:7 which appears contradictory, an unbeliever genuinely seeking the truth would be confused and just dismiss the Bible as a cock and bull story.
See why Christianity is looking more and more unacceptable each day?

Please go and read from chapter 2 so that you get a grasp of the circumstances surrounding what happened in the verse you referenced. Judging from the context of the previous three chapters, those visited at home were already believers, hence weren't undergoing fresh proselytization for which house to house visits were forbidden by Christ Himself.

As for the bolded: you are wrong altogether.
Your accusations here are actually inverted because it is well known that it is the JWs that have for years formed the habit of preaching out of malice, hatred, jealousy' and the intention to ridicule other Christians. Your magazines are full of hate messages against other Christians. Your magazines are not ready for publication if you have not created an article to pass judgements on other Christians particularly Catholics. Why not join Catholics if you can't beat them? Have your own attacks on other Christians been able to stop them either, despite they don't waste spaces in their own magazines to reply you? It takes a hate filled people to suspect hate in others. Out of the abundance of your own hearts you have spoken hatred, castigation, malicious publications against other Christians and called them names. How are the purveyors of hatred and divisiveness seeing same in others? If it appears to you that some of the doctrines of other Christians are wrong, is that enough for you to accuse them of worshipping a false God? Were the Christians in Asia Minor churches not in error at different times until Paul would come around to correct them again? Did that mean that each time they were sincerely ignorant of the scriptures, they were automatically worshipping a false God? And who told you that you yourselves are better custodians of the scriptures above everyone else?
Even if you think you are, are you not rather supposed to join them in interdenominational conferences and point it out to them rather than begin to castigate them before unbelievers? Are you yourselves perfect and faultless? And by the way how many of your own glaring faults have you ever acknowledged?
Of course the way it appears in your eyes that your organization follows the Bible strictly is the same way it appears to all other Christians that their own churches too strictly follow the Bible. Shouldn't it have therefore been ideal for every Christian group to meet on a round table regularly to rob minds towards clarifying one another? But your organization is always too self opinionated and standoffish to see sense in that.

God, with all his wisdom and omniscience called onto the ignorant man in Isiah Chapter 1 saying; "Come let us reason together......". What knowledge does man really posses to reason together with God? But God still called him out to rub minds with. But unfortunately, sinful and ignorant men today proudly claim they alone are knowledgeable enough to interpret the Bible correctly without the need to rub minds with others. Which denomination is most notorious in this regard? Your guess is as good as mine.
And remember that you broke away from these other Christians. Why couldn't you remain with them and rather die trying to correct the heresies you thought you observed in them? Paul the Apostle had the power, the clout, the knowledge, etc required to break away from the Jerusalem Temple for refusing to abandon the apostasy of Judaism for Christianity, but Paul decided to remain a member of that temple and die trying to make them cast of their heretic beliefs despite the enormous persecution he suffered repeatedly in their hands. Wouldn't it have rather been easier for him to just go and form his own religion and start recruiting new followers whose minds he would poison against the temple in Jerusalem? But he never did. Whenever he returned to Jerusalem he always visited the temple to try correcting their doctrines however much it looked futile to keep trying.

removetheturban:
I only asked a question that required a simple Bible verse. Even if I didn't know it, I could easily search for it whereas it is a very popular Bible verse. There are many reasons for asking questions. I feel that Christians should quote from the Bible and not insinuate things from their own thoughts. Jehovah's Witnesses endeavour to make citations from the Bible at all times. It is appalling to read a whole chapter of criticism from you without a single scripture cited. I didn't consider that alright and I feel better that you are using your Bible now. I advise you to continue doing what you just did in this comment. It will make you a sound Christian.

In the other vein, it is an honour to refer you to the second of my questions. You went along denigrating the JW and forgot to answer it. What aspect of the Mormonic doctrines do you find most intriguing? Can you answer, please?

As per the bolded, I can see that you are plain dishonest and untruthful. How could you so accuse me when I quoted Mathew 7:5 in the very comment for which you accuse me of not citing any Bible verse? You have been dodging questions here and attacking persons instead. What sort of Christianity is that? And after throwing all the jibes you still ended up not addressing the very issue I raised and used that Mathew 7:15 as a backup up.
Are we supposed to be this dubious and evasive as Christians?

As per the issue of Mormonism; your question is another dishonest deviation from the original issue raised. You were asked whether the Mormons' house to house preaching mode also qualifies them as the only God approved organization since that is the criterion according to your organization. But rather than address the issue squarely, you tried to change the topic to "the most intriguing aspect of Mormonism". How is that related to the question he asked you? Why are you so evasive?

switnpea:
I don't have time to talk to you about this!! Maybe the next time they knock at your door try to listen. It's very very important. I hope you remember this expression someday, and wish you had.

Peace bro

It is rather surprising that after taking my time out to make it clear here the several instances in which I listened to JWs and then asked them questions which rather than give scripture-backed answers to they stopped visiting me, you still choose to advise me to listen to them the next time they come to me. Don't you get it that I mean they are no longer coming? How is it possible to listen to a people avoiding me for my questions they have no answer to? You should rather advise them to answer my questions whenever next they come if you yourself can't answer me here.

You people boast of 100℅ reliance on the Bible for your beliefs, but I have shown you explicit biblical references which stand clearly against some of your beliefs, but rather than show me other Bible verses to counter mine you are asking me to listen to a people that I have no hope of seeing.
Then why did I bring my questions here?

removetheturban:
Sane people say 'when they go low, we go high'. If you intend to stay low, it has no connection with the world. If you chose to be bitter about yourself, the world does not revolve around you. Regardless of the intensity that you desire to achieve with this, futility awaits you in the end. Proverbs 4:16 King James Bible
For they sleep not, except they have done mischief; and their sleep is taken away, unless they cause some to fall.

Your proverb above actually applies more to you as you are the ones who have chosen to stay low in envious bitterness of other Christians by always attacking them both in your publications and oral sermons.
Can you show me just one publication in which any other Christian denomination has ever attacked JW? You can't find one! So judge for yourself who has decided to remain low.

removetheturban:
Do you want them to give the money to you? Why are you envious of someone success. one pastor says "control your jealousy'. Do you think that he is right?
Where did you get the blasphemy in the bolded?

Below is how you accused him of blasphemy for accusing your organization of dishonest financial dealings which now prompted me to ask when you became God or the Holy Spirit against whom an accusation constitutes blasphemy.

See the conversation below:


by removetheturban : 10:23pm On Feb 11
Do you want them to give the money to you? Why are you envious of someone success. one pastor says "control your jealousy'. Do you think that he is right?
Hairyrapunzel :
They had money to build Warwick. They got money from the sale of their old headquarters which their members built free of charge.
Money that they guilt trip people into donating. Mtchewww
Where did you get the blasphemy in the bolded?

Emmanystone:
My dear, this is the question i have been asking. Where are the JW who claim they are the real Christians when fake Christians are being killed by Muslims? JW don't dare take their kingdom arguments to the places where they will be killed.

Their evangelism is amongst the Christians not the unbeliever.

Pls, Jw, just like the Die Heart Evangelicals, take your message to places that must hear it whether satan likes it or not. Oh wait!!!!!, they can't can't face satan.

This is a display of boldness and courage on the part of the Evangelicals and fear and timidity on the part of the JW, and this kind of boldness that makes a man still want to go knowing he can be killed comes only from having the Holy Spirit inside of him. But, the JW doesn't believe that the Holy Spirit is still at work in us today. No wonder they wait for the storm to cool down before going out.


Christians be careful of the JW.

Had a single Kingdom Hall been attacked by Boko Haram, the JWs would have repeatedly made it headlines in their magazines as evidence of persecution of the "true religion", and be accusing Christendom.
But here we are with the victim Christian churches not even making any issues out of the attacks because they know that persecution should normally be expected as Christ had forewarned them.
The other denominations secretly rejoice to find themselves worthy of persecution and tribulations for Christ while JWs resent and cry against in through every means available to them.

mitchyy:
If you that is what you believe, peace unto you as well my friend

I couldn't resist one last comment

I thought you said you were not at my beck and call? Oh I can see it only applies to the questions I raise about your doctrines.

mitchyy:
No. I won't address any question raised. Why? Witnesses at not at your beck and call. A lot of pages have been dedicated to this issue and lots of fellow witnesses have said all that needs to be said.
Secondly, this is Monday. A lot of witnesses are not jobless.
If this comment leaves behind me a trail of attacks from you and others, you still won't get a response from me because I'll be busy attending to my family and business

Written publications can't answer the question that arise in the mind after reading the publications hence a direct face to face interaction is indispensable. Much as there was existing collection of written scripture in Christ's time on earth he still took time to orally answer questions about God and did not just redirect all questions to those written scriptures?
Why then do you direct me not even to the Bible but to mere literature of magazines and publications subject to error by virtue of their human authorship?

Well, Jesus was so much at the beck and call of everyone that He cut short His sleep to answer Nicodemus' questions, frequently denied Himself rest to attend to as many as came to him for spiritual education, etc. It is not recorded anywhere in the Bible that he told anyone he was too busy to answer his questions however silly or unnecessary such questions might be. Why then are members of our God-approved organization telling people off with excuses of being busy, and calling such questions attacks?

The truth is that you really got no answer. After all you had earlier shoved off my question by implicitly alleging me of seeking to be noticed.
Peace be unto you all the same!

mitchyy:
Now its no longer the fact that we preach that is an issue, its the bag we carry? A bag?

You have been noticed!

The manner in which the preaching is done is the very issue of this thread, and the carrying of bags and magazines from house to house is part of it.
Please address the questions raised.

mitchyy:
You have been noticed. Good morning!

That is an escapist route away from the challenge you have been confronted with here.
How does this kind of response address the numerous questions placed before you here? We are asking you these questions not to be noticed but to learn from you since you claim you alone are God approved. Are we the children of the devil wrong to want to learn from the true children of God like you?

switnpea:
Jealousy is when some one thinks he knows what is right, and yet not doing it. And when they sees one doing the right thing they become UNNECESSARILY furious...

Pride, arrogance and carnal mindedness is when one refuses to heed scripture-based corrections but terms it jealousy.
The Bible is against house to house preaching, so you can't claim you are doing the right thing by getting involved in it.
You either accept that you are wrong or prove us wrong with superior evidence from the same Bible. Is the Bible no longer our ultimate guide?

Verses in Luke chapter 10 say:

"Go! I am sending you like lambs among wolves. Don't take a purse or a beggar's bag or shoes..."

This means the disciples should not directly or indirectly beg unbelievers for financial assistance towards growing their ministry. But we see those who call themselves the only God approved organization begging unbelievers for financial contributions to the growth of their ministry through buying of their magazines. Is salvation at a cost? Funnily enough this denomination notorious for building their halls from funds solicited from unbelievers condemn other Christians who build their churches strictly from funds raised from among their congregations alone. Who is fooling who?



"....don't stop to greet anyone on the road.5 Whenever you go into a house, first say, ‘Peace be with this house.’ 6 If someone who is peace-loving lives there, let your greeting of peace remain on that person; if not, take back your greeting of peace. 7 Stay in that same house, eating and drinking whatever they offer you, for workers should be given their pay...."

This means on arrival at the target town they should first locate a house where there is a believer or potential believer ready to lodge and accommodate them for the duration of the exercise.

"Don't move around from one house to another."

Here is the specific instruction given in unequivocal terms against house to house preaching.

8.Whenever you go into a town and are made welcome, eat what is set before you, 9 heal the sick in that town, and say to the people there, ‘The Kingdom of God has come near you.’

This obviously means to speak the message to residents of the town as a public announcement which the other Christian Churches do today in the form of open air crusades accompanied with healings.


10.But whenever you go into a town and are not welcomed, go out in the streets and say, 11 ‘Even the dust from your town that sticks to our feet we wipe off against you. But remember that the Kingdom of God has come near you!

What we see above is town, town, town and not individual houses. So where did this people get this house to house doctrine from?

alBHAGDADI:
You claim there are no Kingdom halls in those places cos JW fear they will be burnt, but preaching takes place there. How can the JW style of house to house preaching take place in a country that doesn't want to hear the gospel and are eager to burn Churches and Christians? The questions i, how many JW kingdom halls have been burnt in those places? Why should the cost of building again bother you when you boast of being 8 million JW? Will the provision of the money be too hard for your 8 million members?

Every place where the Apostles were killed today, you will find that those places still have Churches standing. If the other disciples were to reason like JW, Christianity won't have had a solid footing there. Paul was killed in Rome, today Christianity abounds there.

Just admit that the only presence you have in hostile countries is an online presence. And do give credit to those who endure it all and are actually on ground despite persecution to ensure Christianity is established in hostile grounds.

The

Kudos to you once again.
The guy even said that their online preaching can substitute for physical presence in those hostile lands. Then what were they substituting with donkey years before the invention of the internet? Who evangelizes the rural parts of those countries which are out of coverage? What of those living in the cities of those countries but too poor to afford data subscription constantly?
There is no way online preaching can really completely substitute for physical presence.
It is after the other denominations' current attempts to open up those countries through risky physical presence start yielding results that these fearful online preachers will storm the place and start telling the converts that it was a false religion they were made to accept.
May God forgive us.