₦airaland Forum

achorladey:
The same EGYPTIANS. These Egyptians are definitely CHRISTIANS not pagans

Bros, On your wedding day you exchange wedding rings and your wedding cake was gallant, was your marriage paganism?

Janosky:
Any activity for Jehovah's worship is NOT special to Achorladey.
Except paganism .
Bros, quantirinu

What can I do but

Janosky:
Bros, On your wedding day you exchange wedding rings and your wedding cake was gallant, was your marriage paganism?

Oga face what is before you.......

The same EGYPTIANS. These Egyptians are definitely CHRISTIANS not pagans

The palaver is not what happened on my wedding day

achorladey:
Oga face what is before you.......

The same EGYPTIANS. These Egyptians are definitely CHRISTIANS not pagans

The palaver is not what happened on my wedding day

Bros, quantirinu to DECEIVE yourself

Bros you should have studied achorladey in and out all these years!
The guy will be determined to argue as long as you're trying to be specific on any unique rule that's uncommon, no matter how glaring it is a tradition or custom stands against God's word achorladey will welcome it as long as it's acceptable to the majority. Exodus 23:1-2

So he just wants to flow with the trend, he's not interested in the truth since that will make him different in the midst of his friends! James 4:4; 1John 2:15-17

That's why whenever he comes up with any sarcastic but thought provoking question, i will respond for the sake of other followers {Luke 12:11-12} but when i found out that he's shot of words and just want to argue blindly i ignore him! Philippians 2:14; Colossians 2:4; 1Timothy 6:4; Titus 3:9

Janosky:
Bros, quantirinu to DECEIVE yourself

KNOWMORE56:
Continue the good work. All I understand is that the very thing they accuse others, themselves are into it.

Thanks

MaxInDHouse:
Bros you should have studied achorladey in and out all these years!
The guy will be determined to argue as long as you're trying to be specific on any unique rule that's uncommon, no matter how glaring it is a tradition or custom stands against God's word achorladey will welcome it as long as it's acceptable to the majority. Exodus 23:1-2

So he just wants to flow with the trend, he's not interested in the truth since that will make him different in the midst of his friends! James 4:4; 1John 2:15-17

That's why whenever he comes up with any sarcastic but thought provoking question, i will respond for the sake of other followers {Luke 12:11-12} but when i found out that he's shot of words and just want to argue blindly i ignore him! Philippians 2:14; Colossians 2:4; 1Timothy 6:4; Titus 3:9

Keywords......determined to argue as long as you're trying to be specific on any unique rule that's uncommon

He always ARGUE any discussion is tagged ARGUMENT. The name of the platform is FORUM, nairalnad FORUM . Save us the argument tag .


how glaring it is a tradition or custom stands against God's word achorladey will welcome it as long as it's acceptable to the majority

e.g use of WEDDING RINGS abi?


So he just wants to flow with the trend, he's not interested in the truth since that will make him different in the midst of his friends

This must be an audition to be my SPOKESPERSON It is not as if we have not discussed about this TRUTH before including ones that evolve from PAST, PRESENT and FUTURE TRUTH

I will respond for the sake of other followers

If you like respond for the sake of non folowers your palaver. The response are nothing to write home about e.g discussion(not argument ) we had on the LOST SHEEP of the HOUSE of ISRAEL and many others


argue blindly i ignore him

Question: How do MaxInDhouse ignore someone?

Answer: By mentioning or calling out the moniker of such person twice in a post and the said post is majorly about that person too.

The meaning of ignore is outdated. There is need to update it meaning. When you are done as usual you will go back into the IMPOSED EMBARGO placed on you by yourself.

MaxInDHouse:
New Year, Christmas and Birthdays has nothing to do with God's arrangement like bond between a legally married couple (Marriage) remembrance of such sweet union (wedding anniversary) and so many that brings glory to our Creator Sir! Philippians 4:8 compared to 1Thessalonians 5:21

Wedding anniversary is unscriptural

Each year Adam and Eve would have continued remembering that day when God did the introduction and said "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother, and stick to his wife and they will become one flesh" Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5
Go out there and find any pagan culture that can explain that apart from the Bible, before coming to argue over what no human tradition knows how it began apart from God himself!

edoairways:
Wedding anniversary is unscriptural

Janosky:
THRASHY thread.
Marriage originates from Jehovah.

Rott Wailer is so deluded
That's akin to claiming that because Egyptian temples had ornaments , for your deluded mind, the use of ornaments in Jehovah's temple amounts to idolatry
Bros, you get SENSE?

Rott Wailer loves pagans so much and he's so deluded to believe that use of ornaments is the exclusive preserve of his pagan friends.

The video above listed 5 Pagan Practices adopted and used by JWs.
- Exchange of Wedding Rings
- Wedding cakes
- Flowers on Graves
- Wind Chimes
- Watchtower Logo
If JWs were to apply the same justifications for forbidding Christmas, Birthday and New Celebration to the above practices, JW members would not be engaging in them…

Fallacies
When presenting an argument, one can do so in an honest, principled and genuine way. On the other hand, there are dishonest, unprincipled and artificial methods of argumentation. A fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning or wrong moves in the construction of an argument. It is a reasoning that is logically incorrect which undermines the logical validity of an argument and is recognized as unsound.

I want to take a look of some of the common fallacies and how you use in this post…

The Red Herring Fallacy.
In this fallacy, the arguer tries to sidetrack his/her audience by raising an irrelevant issue and then claims that the original issue has effectively been settled by the irrelevant diversion.

Example:
Someone employing this fallacy says that “there is a good deal of talk these days about the need to eliminate pesticides from our fruits and vegetables. But many of these foods are essential to our health. Carrots are an excellent source of vitamin A, broccoli is rich in iron, and oranges and grapefruits have lots of Vitamin C.”

This is red herring. He tries to sidetrack the audience from main issue by raising irrelevant issues. Plans to eliminate/reduce pesticides probably don’t entail stopping the production of common vegetables: the arguer’s suggestion that they do is an irrelevant red herring.

The Strawman Fallacy
In this fallacy, the arguer distorts/caricatures an opponent’s arguments or views, and then attacks the weakened version rather than the real argument.

Example:
Margaret says: “We have to do something about greenhouse gases. The government should raise vehicle fuel efficiency standards to cut down the amount of CO2 we release over the next 20 years”.

Roger Says: “Margaret’s solution would be a disaster. It would kill the economy. How would people get to work without cars?”

Roger reasoning is fallacious because he claims that Margaret is proposing measures that would eliminate cars. Margaret has not said anything equivalent to that but rather improving on standards of vehicle efficiency to cut down CO2 emissions which would come at a price for the manufacturing company. This is a strawman argument. Roger misrepresentation Margaret opposing arguments, in the place of the real point at issue.

The Ad Hominem or ‘At the Person’ Fallacy.
In this fallacy, the arguer rejects the opponent’s argument by attacking the person rather than evaluating their argument on its merits.

Example:
Someone Writes to the Editor of a new media, “Dear Editor, The current campaign against combining drinking with driving is terrorizing law-abiding people. Many law-abiding people are cutting their alcohol consumption because they are afraid of being caught by random breath testing. But research shows that the average drink-driver in a fatal accident has an average blood alcohol level of more than twice the legal limit. The current campaign against drinking and driving is failing to achieve what should be our top priority; getting the heavy and hardened drinkers off the road.”- Douglas Myers. CEO, Dominion Breweries.

Another Writes to the same Editor “Dear Editor, I read Doug Myer’s letter yesterday but he is the CEO of a major brewing company! He has a vested interest in keeping alcohol sales up, and the anti-drink-driving campaign threatens to reduce alcohol sales. We shouldn’t take any notice of his views about drinking and driving”.

The above illustrate the seriousness of this flawed reasoning. If Myer has given arguments in favour of his view, it should be evaluated like any other argument – are they valid? strong? sound? cogent? – rather than writing them off because of facts about him.

Faulty Analogy
In this fallacy, similarities exist but not the kind needed to prove the conclusions argued for.

Example:
Someone says: I need a new car. My last three cars have all been reliable, and they were blue. So, I’m going to buy a blue car.

A letter to the editor following a report someone had been turned away from an after-hours medical clinic because she couldn’t pay for treatment for her feverish, vomiting child: “Why do people attend private clinics for medical treatment with insufficient funds to cover fees? Do these same people go to the petrol station, fill up, toss $5 out the window and say “I’ll be back with the rest later,” or perhaps after dining out one evening, pay for the meal and promise to return next week, month or year to pay for the wine? I think not. The answer is simple – don’t go to private clinics.”

Are visits to after-hours medical clinics with a sick child analogous to visits to a gas station or a restaurant?

Janosky Employs Red Herring, Ad Hominem, Straw Man, Faulty Analogies

What are the reasons JWs forbid Christmas/Easter/Birthday?
- pagan origin, (that true worshippers should not have anything to do with paganism)
- not base on the bible or of divine origin
- no servant of God did it
- not having any sharing with anything that may have unchristian root

The video explores the pagan origin of wedding rings exchange in marriages and wedding cakes practices not marriages in particular. On meticulous scrutinize, the reasoning for the prohibition of Christmas/Easter/Birthday customs also exists for use of Wedding Cakes and Exchange of Wedding Rings (Let’s limit ourselves to these two).

Exchange of Wedding Rings and use of Wedding Cakes are of:
- pagan origin, (going by JWs logic, true worshippers should not have anything to do with paganism)
-customs sanctified by their adoption by the church the same way Christmas/Easter/Birthday were.
- customs not base on the bible/of divine origin. God/Jesus never commanded his faithful worshippers/disciples to do any of these
- customs no servant of God in the old or new testament engaged in.
- customs not true Christians should have not sharing with since they are of unchristian root

The video only focuses on their pagan origin and their non-Biblical traditions connected with religious rites with superstitious practices related to spiritism. However, the same justifications used in the prohibitions of Christmas/Easter/Birthday also holds true for exchange of wedding rings and use of wedding cakes.

This is the key point. The justifications for the prohibition of one these holds true for the others.

[center]NB: It has to be noted and stated clearly that in many places around the world, marriages are perform without the two practices of exchange wedding rings and use of wedding cakes. The lack of these practices would not invalidate the sacred bond of marriage nor would it mean that marriages did not originate from God.[/center]

Probably not necessarily resulting from a conscious decision from himself, perhaps born of a subconscious realization that the proof is not as strong as he might wish, that the counter-arguments are strong. Janosky not necessarily trying to convince readers; perhaps without realizing it, trying to convince himself resorted to deceptive reasoning, reasoning meant to manipulates the minds of readers, even his own. Quite possible due to the desire to be “loyal” to the position and doctrine of his mother organization cause the mind to develop reasoning that is not sound in order to shore up the position argued for.

While the video explores the non-biblical roots of these practices, without analyzing the video for its accuracy/validity of the point raised; and probably to discourage others from doing so, Janosky without began with an Ad Hominem attack on the person (post) “THRASHY thread” and then retorted with a Straw Man’s argument “Marriage originates from Jehovah”. He hopes that by calling the post thrashy, this would dissuade others from carrying their independent research/analysis. With the employ of the Straw Man, he distorts the main or real argument on an particular aspect of the marriage rituals (pagan origin of exchange of wedding rings/use of wedding cakes) and then attacks the weakened version (marriage) which was not the point raised.

He then throws another Ad Hominem attack “Rott Wailer [rottennaija] is so deluded”. The attack has no relations with the topic, but somehow, he hopes that name-calling will stick, that the readers will be distracted by the red herring of “Marriage originates from Jehovah” while the argument of the pagan origin of wedding ring, cake practices are ignored, of course he ignored the mention of these completely.

Adopting the methods of his mother organization, Janosky introduces fallacy of false analogy by positing “That's akin to claiming that because Egyptian temples had ornaments… the use of ornaments in Jehovah's temple amounts to idolatry grin cheesy”. Of course, mixed with Ad Hominem personal attacks of “for your deluded mind” and “Bros, you get SENSE?”

The JW organization argues in the same direction in an attempt to avoid raised issues related to wedding rings/cakes. While acknowledging the pagan root of these popular marriage customs, they claim their pagan origin does not really matter “but whether they were originally used as part of false religious practices and still retain such religious significance." The facts are; aside form their pagan customs, they were originally used as part of false religious practices with superstitious practices/believes related to spiritism, but they do not retain such religious significance today.

The justification used to ignore the use popular marriage customs as wedding rings/cakes quickly evaporates when birthdays, easter and Christmas are considered. All these celebrations have pagan roots, was used as part of false religious practices with superstitious practices/believes related to spiritism. But do they still retain such religious significance today? Janosky and its mother organization ignore answers to these.

Janosky's use of Irrelevant Comparison or False Analogy can be seen in his exchange of pagan origin of customs/practices with usage. While conveniently ignoring its pagan origin, including the false religious practices with superstitious practices/believes related to spiritism, he said that the post is akin to claiming that because one group uses "ornaments", then it would a sin, idolatry for another to use same. The irrelevance of this comparison is not whether ones’ group use of something prompt a prohibition of another group from using it, but the pagan origin of it. Or will his irrelevant comparison now excuse JWs in designing cross symbol in their cloths, even if it were not worshipped or use in any part of worship? Or will it now excuse Jws to purchase earrings and necklaces with the cross symbol without having to feel guilt over it?

As has been repeated many times, the very reasons JWs prohibits popular customs is not because others religious groups use it. Many religious groups had pioneered the use of tele-evangelism, use of websites for dissemination of religious information, use of zoom for meetings, sound instrument among many others before the JWs employ the use of these modern-day technology heavily today. The very use of these by the JWs in itself does not constitute a sin nor an idolatry. But the very reason they prohibit these popular customs is because they chose to scrutinize meticulously their origin and use same as the basis for its rejection and its prohibitions.

Employing its deceptive reasoning, Janosky diverts attention from the meticulous scrutiny of its pagan origin to use of similar items between different religious group even while it’s obvious that its pagan origin, it links to false religious practices with superstitious practices/believes related to spiritism was the main contention.

HYPROCRITICAL POSITION IN PRACTICE
You must not have in your bag two different stone weights, a large one and a small one. You must not have in your house two different measuring containers, a large one and a small one. You should keep an accurate and honest weight and an accurate and honest measure, so that you will live long in the land that Jehovah your God is giving you. For every unjust person who does such things is detestable to Jehovah your God. - Deuteronomy 25:13-16

All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must do to them. This, in fact, is what the Law and the Prophets mean. – Mt 7:12

Dishonest weights are detestable to Jehovah, And deceptive scales are not good. - Proverbs 20:23

Dishonest scales are detestable to Jehovah, But an accurate weight brings pleasure to him. - Proverbs 11:1

The bible verses above offer sound moral principles when making doctrinal proclamations, especially ones that has life and death implications. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Awake! article of 2000, January 8, pages 27 provided these justifications for adopting these two pagan practices “But what about customs that may once have been linked to questionable practices but that today are primarily viewed as social etiquette? For example, many popular wedding customs—including the exchanging of rings and the eating of cake—may have pagan origins. Does this mean that Christians are forbidden to observe such customs? Are Christians required to scrutinize meticulously each custom of the community to see whether somewhere or at some time it had negative connotations?”

Notice how the WT writer tries to minimize the implications with the use of the expression “customs that may once have been linked to questionable practices”. Using the same sly wordings, one can say that popular customs like Christmas and birthday may have a one-time been linked to questionable practices. The WT writer argues that these practices may have had pagan origin. As historically proven, there is no may about it, the practices clearly had a pagan origin.

The Awake! article continues “Paul points out that “where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom.” (2 Corinthians 3:17; James 1:25) God wants us to use this freedom, not as an inducement for selfish cravings, but to train our perceptive powers to distinguish right from wrong. (Galatians 5:13; Hebrews 5:14; 1 Peter 2:16) Hence, in a matter where there is no clear violation of Bible principles, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not create a hard-and-fast rule. Instead, each Christian must weigh the circumstances at hand and make a personal decision.”

There were no clear bible principles against Birthday and Christmas until the WT created them. There is non against Wedding Rings/cakes unless the WT is willing to create them. While there no clear bible principles against the use of the Gregorian Calendar named after pagan gods, the WT tried to create some but later abandoned the ridiculous idea. If they had persisted, JWs would be avoiding Gregorian Calendars as a plague.

https://www.jwfacts.com/images/calendar-of-jehovah-god.jpg
Abandoned Watchtower Calendar For Lack Of Practicality

To avoid sounding as a hypocrite in justifying these pagan practices, the WT writer is presented the above argument. If clear bible principles were violated in adoption of pagan celebration of Christmas, Easter, Birthday and New Year, the same clear principles are violated in the adoption of Pagan practices of Wedding Cakes, Exchange of Wedding Rings etc. If no clear bible principles were violated in wedding rings and cakes, no such principles exist for Christmas, Birthday, Easter and New Year celebrations.

If Christians were required to scrutinize meticulously Christmas, Easter, Birthday and New Year Celebrations and based on such scrutiny deemed them “non-Biblical traditions connected with religious holidays … or with superstitious practices related to spiritism”; then Christians are should be expected to scrutinize meticulously customs/traditions such as exchange of Wedding Rings, Wedding Cakes, Flowers on Graves, Wind Chimes and the use of Watchtower Logo which are clearly of pagan origin connected with religious superstitious practices.

WT publication, What Has Religion Done for Mankind? (1951), pages 276, 277, quotes Catholic cardinal Newman as saying:

“The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the [song] Kyrie Eleison [Lord, have mercy], are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church." - Pages 355, 371, 373, Edition of 1881.”

Watchtower 1972 January 15 p.63 Questions from Readers says: "Even if it were a fact that pagans first used wedding rings, would that rule such out for Christians? Not necessarily. Many of today's articles of clothing and aspects of life originated in pagan lands… Really, the question is not so much whether wedding rings were first used by pagans but whether they were originally used as part of false religious practices and still retain such religious significance.”

Watchtower of February 15, 2007, page 30 says: “the wedding ring at one time had religious significance. Yet, most people today do not know that, considering a wedding ring a mere evidence that someone is married.”

WT quotes Hitler as writing “The intelligence of the masses is small. Their forgetfulness is great. They must be told the same thing a thousand times.” JWs are indoctrinated repeated to scrutinize and place intense emphasis on the pagan origin of Christmas, Birthday, Easter, New Year celebrations. They are to scrutinize meticulously these celebrations while Watch Tower organization simply glosses over this in other areas as demonstrated above.

rottennaija:
The video above listed 5 Pagan Practices adopted and used by JWs.
- Exchange of Wedding Rings
- Wedding cakes
- Flowers on Graves
- Wind Chimes
- Watchtower Logo
If JWs were to apply the same justifications for forbidding Christmas, Birthday and New Celebration to the above practices, JW members would not be engaging in them…

Fallacies
When presenting an argument, one can do so in an honest, principled and genuine way. On the other hand, there are dishonest, unprincipled and artificial methods of argumentation. A fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning or wrong moves in the construction of an argument. It is a reasoning that is logically incorrect which undermines the logical validity of an argument and is recognized as unsound.

I want to take a look of some of the common fallacies and how you use in this post…

The Red Herring Fallacy.
In this fallacy, the arguer tries to sidetrack his/her audience by raising an irrelevant issue and then claims that the original issue has effectively been settled by the irrelevant diversion.

Example:
Someone employing this fallacy says that “there is a good deal of talk these days about the need to eliminate pesticides from our fruits and vegetables. But many of these foods are essential to our health. Carrots are an excellent source of vitamin A, broccoli is rich in iron, and oranges and grapefruits have lots of Vitamin C.”

This is red herring. He tries to sidetrack the audience from main issue by raising irrelevant issues. Plans to eliminate/reduce pesticides probably don’t entail stopping the production of common vegetables: the arguer’s suggestion that they do is an irrelevant red herring.

The Strawman Fallacy
In this fallacy, the arguer distorts/caricatures an opponent’s arguments or views, and then attacks the weakened version rather than the real argument.

Example:
Margaret says: “We have to do something about greenhouse gases. The government should raise vehicle fuel efficiency standards to cut down the amount of CO2 we release over the next 20 years”.

Roger Says: “Margaret’s solution would be a disaster. It would kill the economy. How would people get to work without cars?”

Roger reasoning is fallacious because he claims that Margaret is proposing measures that would eliminate cars. Margaret has not said anything equivalent to that but rather improving on standards of vehicle efficiency to cut down CO2 emissions which would come at a price for the manufacturing company. This is a strawman argument. Roger misrepresentation Margaret opposing arguments, in the place of the real point at issue.

The Ad Hominem or ‘At the Person’ Fallacy.
In this fallacy, the arguer rejects the opponent’s argument by attacking the person rather than evaluating their argument on its merits.

Example:
Someone Writes to the Editor of a new media, “Dear Editor, The current campaign against combining drinking with driving is terrorizing law-abiding people. Many law-abiding people are cutting their alcohol consumption because they are afraid of being caught by random breath testing. But research shows that the average drink-driver in a fatal accident has an average blood alcohol level of more than twice the legal limit. The current campaign against drinking and driving is failing to achieve what should be our top priority; getting the heavy and hardened drinkers off the road.”- Douglas Myers. CEO, Dominion Breweries.

Another Writes to the same Editor “Dear Editor, I read Doug Myer’s letter yesterday but he is the CEO of a major brewing company! He has a vested interest in keeping alcohol sales up, and the anti-drink-driving campaign threatens to reduce alcohol sales. We shouldn’t take any notice of his views about drinking and driving”.

The above illustrate the seriousness of this flawed reasoning. If Myer has given arguments in favour of his view, it should be evaluated like any other argument – are they valid? strong? sound? cogent? – rather than writing them off because of facts about him.

Faulty Analogy
In this fallacy, similarities exist but not the kind needed to prove the conclusions argued for.

Example:
Someone says: I need a new car. My last three cars have all been reliable, and they were blue. So, I’m going to buy a blue car.

A letter to the editor following a report someone had been turned away from an after-hours medical clinic because she couldn’t pay for treatment for her feverish, vomiting child: “Why do people attend private clinics for medical treatment with insufficient funds to cover fees? Do these same people go to the petrol station, fill up, toss $5 out the window and say “I’ll be back with the rest later,” or perhaps after dining out one evening, pay for the meal and promise to return next week, month or year to pay for the wine? I think not. The answer is simple – don’t go to private clinics.”

Are visits to after-hours medical clinics with a sick child analogous to visits to a gas station or a restaurant?

Janosky Employs Red Herring, Ad Hominem, Straw Man, Faulty Analogies

What are the reasons JWs forbid Christmas/Easter/Birthday?
- pagan origin, (that true worshippers should not have anything to do with paganism)
- not base on the bible or of divine origin
- no servant of God did it
- not having any sharing with anything that may have unchristian root

The video explores the pagan origin of wedding rings exchange in marriages and wedding cakes practices not marriages in particular. On meticulous scrutinize, the reasoning for the prohibition of Christmas/Easter/Birthday customs also exists for use of Wedding Cakes and Exchange of Wedding Rings (Let’s limit ourselves to these two).

Exchange of Wedding Rings and use of Wedding Cakes are of:
- pagan origin, (going by JWs logic, true worshippers should not have anything to do with paganism)
-customs sanctified by their adoption by the church the same way Christmas/Easter/Birthday were.
- customs not base on the bible/of divine origin. God/Jesus never commanded his faithful worshippers/disciples to do any of these
- customs no servant of God in the old or new testament engaged in.
- customs not true Christians should have not sharing with since they are of unchristian root

The video only focuses on their pagan origin and their non-Biblical traditions connected with religious rites with superstitious practices related to spiritism. However, the same justifications used in the prohibitions of Christmas/Easter/Birthday also holds true for exchange of wedding rings and use of wedding cakes.

This is the key point. The justifications for the prohibition of one these holds true for the others.

[center]NB: It has to be noted and stated clearly that in many places around the world, marriages are perform without the two practices of exchange wedding rings and use of wedding cakes. The lack of these practices would not invalidate the sacred bond of marriage nor would it mean that marriages did not originate from God.[/center]

Probably not necessarily resulting from a conscious decision from himself, perhaps born of a subconscious realization that the proof is not as strong as he might wish, that the counter-arguments are strong. Janosky not necessarily trying to convince readers; perhaps without realizing it, trying to convince himself resorted to deceptive reasoning, reasoning meant to manipulates the minds of readers, even his own. Quite possible due to the desire to be “loyal” to the position and doctrine of his mother organization cause the mind to develop reasoning that is not sound in order to shore up the position argued for.

While the video explores the non-biblical roots of these practices, without analyzing the video for its accuracy/validity of the point raised; and probably to discourage others from doing so, Janosky without began with an Ad Hominem attack on the person (post) “THRASHY thread” and then retorted with a Straw Man’s argument “Marriage originates from Jehovah”. He hopes that by calling the post thrashy, this would dissuade others from carrying their independent research/analysis. With the employ of the Straw Man, he distorts the main or real argument on an particular aspect of the marriage rituals (pagan origin of exchange of wedding rings/use of wedding cakes) and then attacks the weakened version (marriage) which was not the point raised.

He then throws another Ad Hominem attack “Rott Wailer [rottennaija] is so deluded”. The attack has no relations with the topic, but somehow, he hopes that name-calling will stick, that the readers will be distracted by the red herring of “Marriage originates from Jehovah” while the argument of the pagan origin of wedding ring, cake practices are ignored, of course he ignored the mention of these completely.

Adopting the methods of his mother organization, Janosky introduces fallacy of false analogy by positing “That's akin to claiming that because Egyptian temples had ornaments… the use of ornaments in Jehovah's temple amounts to idolatry grin cheesy”. Of course, mixed with Ad Hominem personal attacks of “for your deluded mind” and “Bros, you get SENSE?”

The JW organization argues in the same direction in an attempt to avoid raised issues related to wedding rings/cakes. While acknowledging the pagan root of these popular marriage customs, they claim their pagan origin does not really matter “but whether they were originally used as part of false religious practices and still retain such religious significance." The facts are; aside form their pagan customs, they were originally used as part of false religious practices with superstitious practices/believes related to spiritism, but they do not retain such religious significance today.

The justification used to ignore the use popular marriage customs as wedding rings/cakes quickly evaporates when birthdays, easter and Christmas are considered. All these celebrations have pagan roots, was used as part of false religious practices with superstitious practices/believes related to spiritism. But do they still retain such religious significance today? Janosky and its mother organization ignore answers to these.

Janosky's use of Irrelevant Comparison or False Analogy can be seen in his exchange of pagan origin of customs/practices with usage. While conveniently ignoring its pagan origin, including the false religious practices with superstitious practices/believes related to spiritism, he said that the post is akin to claiming that because one group uses "ornaments", then it would a sin, idolatry for another to use same. The irrelevance of this comparison is not whether ones’ group use of something prompt a prohibition of another group from using it, but the pagan origin of it. Or will his irrelevant comparison now excuse JWs in designing cross symbol in their cloths, even if it were not worshipped or use in any part of worship? Or will it now excuse Jws to purchase earrings and necklaces with the cross symbol without having to feel guilt over it?

As has been repeated many times, the very reasons JWs prohibits popular customs is not because others religious groups use it. Many religious groups had pioneered the use of tele-evangelism, use of websites for dissemination of religious information, use of zoom for meetings, sound instrument among many others before the JWs employ the use of these modern-day technology heavily today. The very use of these by the JWs in itself does not constitute a sin nor an idolatry. But the very reason they prohibit these popular customs is because they chose to scrutinize meticulously their origin and use same as the basis for its rejection and its prohibitions.

Employing its deceptive reasoning, Janosky diverts attention from the meticulous scrutiny of its pagan origin to use of similar items between different religious group even while it’s obvious that its pagan origin, it links to false religious practices with superstitious practices/believes related to spiritism was the main contention.

HYPROCRITICAL POSITION IN PRACTICE
You must not have in your bag two different stone weights, a large one and a small one. You must not have in your house two different measuring containers, a large one and a small one. You should keep an accurate and honest weight and an accurate and honest measure, so that you will live long in the land that Jehovah your God is giving you. For every unjust person who does such things is detestable to Jehovah your God. - Deuteronomy 25:13-16

All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must do to them. This, in fact, is what the Law and the Prophets mean. – Mt 7:12

Dishonest weights are detestable to Jehovah, And deceptive scales are not good. - Proverbs 20:23

Dishonest scales are detestable to Jehovah, But an accurate weight brings pleasure to him. - Proverbs 11:1

The bible verses above offer sound moral principles when making doctrinal proclamations, especially ones that has life and death implications. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Awake! article of 2000, January 8, pages 27 provided these justifications for adopting these two pagan practices “But what about customs that may once have been linked to questionable practices but that today are primarily viewed as social etiquette? For example, many popular wedding customs—including the exchanging of rings and the eating of cake—may have pagan origins. Does this mean that Christians are forbidden to observe such customs? Are Christians required to scrutinize meticulously each custom of the community to see whether somewhere or at some time it had negative connotations?”

Notice how the WT writer tries to minimize the implications with the use of the expression “customs that may once have been linked to questionable practices”. Using the same sly wordings, one can say that popular customs like Christmas and birthday may have a one-time been linked to questionable practices. The WT writer argues that these practices may have had pagan origin. As historically proven, there is no may about it, the practices clearly had a pagan origin.

The Awake! article continues “Paul points out that “where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom.” (2 Corinthians 3:17; James 1:25) God wants us to use this freedom, not as an inducement for selfish cravings, but to train our perceptive powers to distinguish right from wrong. (Galatians 5:13; Hebrews 5:14; 1 Peter 2:16) Hence, in a matter where there is no clear violation of Bible principles, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not create a hard-and-fast rule. Instead, each Christian must weigh the circumstances at hand and make a personal decision.”

There were no clear bible principles against Birthday and Christmas until the WT created them. There is non against Wedding Rings/cakes unless the WT is willing to create them. While there no clear bible principles against the use of the Gregorian Calendar named after pagan gods, the WT tried to create some but later abandoned the ridiculous idea. If they had persisted, JWs would be avoiding Gregorian Calendars as a plague.

https://www.jwfacts.com/images/calendar-of-jehovah-god.jpg
Abandoned Watchtower Calendar For Lack Of Practicality

To avoid sounding as a hypocrite in justifying these pagan practices, the WT writer is presented the above argument. If clear bible principles were violated in adoption of pagan celebration of Christmas, Easter, Birthday and New Year, the same clear principles are violated in the adoption of Pagan practices of Wedding Cakes, Exchange of Wedding Rings etc. If no clear bible principles were violated in wedding rings and cakes, no such principles exist for Christmas, Birthday, Easter and New Year celebrations.

If Christians were required to scrutinize meticulously Christmas, Easter, Birthday and New Year Celebrations and based on such scrutiny deemed them “non-Biblical traditions connected with religious holidays … or with superstitious practices related to spiritism”; then Christians are should be expected to scrutinize meticulously customs/traditions such as exchange of Wedding Rings, Wedding Cakes, Flowers on Graves, Wind Chimes and the use of Watchtower Logo which are clearly of pagan origin connected with religious superstitious practices.

WT publication, What Has Religion Done for Mankind? (1951), pages 276, 277, quotes Catholic cardinal Newman as saying:

“The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the [song] Kyrie Eleison [Lord, have mercy], are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church." - Pages 355, 371, 373, Edition of 1881.”

Watchtower 1972 January 15 p.63 Questions from Readers says: "Even if it were a fact that pagans first used wedding rings, would that rule such out for Christians? Not necessarily. Many of today's articles of clothing and aspects of life originated in pagan lands… Really, the question is not so much whether wedding rings were first used by pagans but whether they were originally used as part of false religious practices and still retain such religious significance.”

Watchtower of February 15, 2007, page 30 says: “the wedding ring at one time had religious significance. Yet, most people today do not know that, considering a wedding ring a mere evidence that someone is married.”

WT quotes Hitler as writing “The intelligence of the masses is small. Their forgetfulness is great. They must be told the same thing a thousand times.” JWs are indoctrinated repeated to scrutinize and place intense emphasis on the pagan origin of Christmas, Birthday, Easter, New Year celebrations. They are to scrutinize meticulously these celebrations while Watch Tower organization simply glosses over this in other areas as demonstrated above.

You want to make im ear full of words. E need am. One scripture I feel like adding

Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent— the Lord detest them both.

achorladey:
You want to make im ear full of words. E need am. One scripture I feel like adding

Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent— the Lord detest them both.

I forgot to add this important scriptures. Thank you.

MaxInDHouse:
Each year Adam and Eve would have continued remembering that day when God did the introduction and said "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother, and stick to his wife and they will become one flesh" Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5
Go out there and find any pagan culture that can explain that apart from the Bible, before coming to argue over what no human tradition knows how it began apart from God himself!

The scripture you posted is wedding not wedding anniversary. A man cleave to his wife not continuing remembering one special day

Christianity is all about high intellect Sir, not just incomprehensible rules that you can't apply with a heart full of appreciation for the one counseling you {Hebrew 5:14} So we are living by principles and not unexplainable laws! Romans 10:4

The wedding day is that day when two individuals of different backgrounds, gender, character, nature, viewpoint, hobbies and so on came together to embark on an unending journey till death part them!

Each year they remember that day, the vow, all the Witnesses, the challenges, sweet and bitter side of having to stick to their promises before God and man, yet they're still together as they vowed! My friend it calls for a celebration on the path of those who cherish promises and are able to keep it!

So i don't need to preach to you about the wedding anniversary because the wedding day is not what God value but their ability to stick to their vows (Marriage) Psalms 116:14

May you have PEACE!

edoairways:
The scripture you posted is wedding not wedding anniversary. A man cleave to his wife not continuing remembering one special day

MaxInDHouse:
Christianity is all about high intellect Sir, not just incomprehensible rules that you can't apply with a heart full of appreciation for the one counseling you {Hebrew 5:14} So we are living by principles and not unexplainable laws! Romans 10:4

The wedding day is that day when two individuals of different backgrounds, gender, character, nature, viewpoint, hobbies and so on came together to embark on an unending journey till death part them!

Each year they remember that day, the vow, all the Witnesses, the challenges, sweet and bitter side of having to stick to their promises before God and man, yet they're still together as they vowed! My friend it calls for a celebration on the path of those who cherish promises and are able to keep it!

So i don't need to preach to you about the wedding anniversary because the wedding day is not what God value but their ability to stick to their vows (Marriage) Psalms 116:14

May you have PEACE!

Shouldnt Christians be living by the scriptures? Why condemn act that suit their narrative and shy from the one that doesn't suit them even though the bible never mention of them. They are quick to condemn christmas but are shy to condemn wedding anniversary. From Genesis to Revelation, no one celebrated christmas or wedding anniversary so why cliche to the bolded

God's people often make feasts just to thank God that they are still keeping to their vows as true worshipers of God the wedding is the one and only vow binding three signatories ~ Husband, Wife and JEHOVAH! Ecclesiastes 4:12
So as long as the couples are together it calls for celebration. It's not compulsory they invite people but it's necessary they continue to thank JEHOVAH for helping them to keep their vows!

My marriage is over two decades now and each year my wife always do something special on that day, so since the first anniversary i never forgot the date till now. I never allowed anything that will take me far away to the point that i won't be by her side that day because she cherish it so much. I don't know about you but for all those who are able to live up to their wedding vows it's something righteous, praiseworthy, virtuous and of serious concern {Philippians 4:8} because it's about TWO not just ONE! Ecclesiastes 4:9

edoairways:
Shouldnt Christians be living by the scriptures? Why condemn act that suit their narrative and shy from the one that doesn't suit them even though the bible never mention of them. They are quick to condemn christmas but are shy to condemn wedding anniversary. From Genesis to Revelation, no one celebrated christmas or wedding anniversary so why cliche to the bolded

edoairways:
The scripture you posted is wedding not wedding anniversary. A man cleave to his wife not continuing remembering one special day

It's a straw man's argument. It's easy for him to argue that than argue the main topic is the pagan origin of wedding anniversary.

Go out there and point to any group of people practicing what JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES rejects nah!
God's people has been blessed with the spirit of wisdom so no matter how hard you try there is no law you can make against them {Galatians 5:23} because their righteousness (that you're trying to falsify) is from JEHOVAH {Isaiah 54:17} that's why you can never ever find a performing group like them! Matthew 5:13-16

Just try and find one just single one that you can vouch for and say "this is where i worship" you'll ever remain amongst the scattered people due to your rebellious heart! Luke 11:23

May you have PEACE!

rottennaija:
It's a straw man's argument. It's easy for him to argue that than argue the main topic is the pagan origin of wedding anniversary.

MaxInDHouse:
God's people often make feasts just to thank God that they are still keeping to their vows as true worshipers of God the wedding is the one and only vow binding three signatories ~ Husband, Wife and JEHOVAH! Ecclesiastes 4:12
So as long as the couples are together it calls for celebration. It's not compulsory they invite people but it's necessary they continue to thank JEHOVAH for helping them to keep their vows!

My marriage is over two decades now and each year my wife always do something special on that day, so since the first anniversary i never forgot the date till now. I never allowed anything that will take me far away to the point that i won't be by her side that day because she cherish it so much. I don't know about you but for all those who are able to live up to their wedding vows it's something righteous, praiseworthy, virtuous and of serious concern {Philippians 4:8} because it's about TWO not just ONE! Ecclesiastes 4:9

The question is,did any of the apostles celebrated wedding anniversary? Secondly, does the bible recommend wedding anniversary

edoairways:
The question is,did any of the apostles celebrated wedding anniversary? Secondly, does the bible recommend wedding anniversary

Jehovah's witnesses don't celebrate anything with pagan origin.
Not like we frown on all celebration. That's a gross misconception.

Marriage is an arrangement from God.
Husband and wife refecting on that Joyful day they became husband and wife is not unscriptural. This couple reviewing the progress they've made to build happy marriage with Mark dowell and maybe extend this excitement to their friends .

haddeylium:
Jehovah's witnesses don't celebrate anything with pagan origin.
Not like we frown on all celebration. That's a gross misconception.

Marriage is an arrangement from God.
Husband and wife refecting on that Joyful day they became husband and wife is not unscriptural. This couple reviewing the progress they've made to build happy marriage with Mark dowell and maybe extend this excitement to their friends .

And you think wedding anniversary is not pagan or you werent informed too?. Do you know the originator of that madness going on?

Hope you're happily married Sir?

May you have PEACE!

edoairways:
The question is,did any of the apostles celebrated wedding anniversary? Secondly, does the bible recommend wedding anniversary?

You don't need to stress yourself brother, it's not everyone that's happily married.
So when you're celebrating your matrimony and vows what do you expect from people who have no joy in their marriages?

haddeylium:
Jehovah's witnesses don't celebrate anything with pagan origin.
Not like we frown on all celebration. That's a gross misconception.

Marriage is an arrangement from God.
Husband and wife refecting on that Joyful day they became husband and wife is not unscriptural. This couple reviewing the progress they've made to build happy marriage with Mark dowell and maybe extend this excitement to their friends .

MaxInDHouse:
Hope you're happily married Sir?

May you have PEACE!

Do not love the things of the world

"The one who created them make and female" {Matthew 19:4-5} is not of the world we LOVE, appreciate and celebrate his arrangement! 1John 2:15

Hope you're happily married Sir?

edoairways:
Do not love the things of the world

MaxInDHouse:
"The one who created them make and female" {Matthew 19:4-5} is not of the world we LOVE, appreciate and celebrate his arrangement! 1John 2:15

Hope you're happily married Sir?

All the pleasures of the world would end soon because they are vanity

edoairways:
And you think wedding anniversary is not pagan or you werent informed too?. Do you know the originator of that madness going on?

You see as e change the word WEDDING to MARRIAGE. He said Marriage is an arrangement from God.

You for ask am straight

Wedding anniversary too is an an arrangement from God?

Look at this again........"Husband and wife reflecting on that Joyful day they became husband and wife is not unscriptural"


Let's rephrase to him as it applies to how they condemn Christmas celebration

People reflecting on that joyful day the Messiah (saviour of the world) is born into the world is unscriptural

edoairways:
The question is,did any of the apostles celebrated wedding anniversary? Secondly, does the bible recommend wedding anniversary

Just like the JWs love asking other Christians who celebrate Christmas

The question is,did any of the apostles celebrated christmas Christ birth)? Secondly, does the bible recommend Christmas?

Naaaaaaaaaaaaa!

The highlighted is gross misconception Sir!

God wants us to be happy because he himself is a happy God {1Timothy 1:11} survivors of the coming destruction will delight themselves in the abundance of PEACE {Psalms 37:11} there's going to be lots and lots of celebrations in the new world because by then we will all know what is right and what is wrong {Jeremiah 31:34} no one will teach another again when God say "You are now free to live forever" Revelations 21:1-5

But until then, we are to listen and obey life saving instructions JEHOVAH is dispensing through our Governing Body {Matthew 24:28} so as to be blessed by JEHOVAH!

May you have PEACE!

edoairways:
All the pleasures of the world would end soon because they are vanity

edoairways:
And you think wedding anniversary is not pagan or you werent informed too?. Do you know the originator of that madness going on?

Someone said it's only the Happily married ones that can reflect on the joyfulness and success of their bond.

Can you relate?
Thanks for your time

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Akìí tojú oníka mesà~nán kàá!

Òrò mò sínú mò síkùn nio!

haddeylium:
Someone said it's only the Happily married ones that can reflect on the joyfulness and success of their bond.

Can you relate?
Thanks for your time

haddeylium:
Someone said it's only the Happily married ones that can reflect on the joyfulness and success of their bond.

Can you relate?
Thanks for your time

If only you knew the origin of some of these celebrations like the way they brain washed people about pagan christmas, you would understand better. I thought JW follows the scriptures, why should they practice something that is not scriptural?. They have been condeming christmas holiday for long using the scriptures but they are shying from the issue of wedding anniversary. To make matter worst, their members( Nigerians) practice two weddings whereas the scriptures recognizes one