achorladey: Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses say they are God’s organization so matter of factly as though such an audacious claim is an undisputable fact?
Here is how one person sees this claim.
"The entire Jehovah’s Witness religion is founded on unsubstantiated hubristic claims which are continually repeated until they are assumed by adherents to be a proven fact.
Never is this more evident than when the beliefs of a Jehovah’s Witness are successfully challenged. The more compelling the evidence against them, the more they resort to repeating their convictions with a sense of insistence, as if they are chanting a mantra.
Confirmation bias is prevalent in all religious ideologies, but particularly with Jehovah’s Witnesses. The reason for this is that their evangelical work puts them in contact with many rival belief systems.
In order to overcome challenges to their beliefs and to prevent any doubts creeping in, Jehovah’s Witnesses have to retreat to their echo chamber to bolster their faith.
By repeatedly discussing their beliefs with fellow believers, they convince themselves that what they teach is the only ‘truth’. As well as supporting their own need for certainty, they in turn are helping to reinforce the delusions of other members.
There is a very interesting logical fallacy which highlights this method of confirmation which Jehovah’s Witnesses use, called ‘proof by repeated assertion’.
Here is a brief description:-
“Proof by repeated assertion is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction and refutation. The proposition can sometimes be repeated until any challenges or opposition ceases, letting the proponent assert it as fact, and solely due to a lack of challengers. In other cases, it’s repetition may be cited as evidence of its truth, in a variant of the appeal to authority fallacy.
…In its extreme form, it can also be a form of brainwashing.”
At their meetings, Jehovah’s Witnesses are trained by role playing, acting out the arguments they regularly encounter in their ministry. However, they only ever consider the scenarios which present the softest resistance to their beliefs.
By constantly ‘overcoming’ the more easy arguments during practice sessions, Jehovah’s Witnesses are lulled into a false sense of security, believing that they have watertight answers to all the questions and objections they can expect to encounter in their ministry.
However, in real life JWs are occasionally confronted with much more profound and difficult challenges to their faith which they have not previously encountered. They invariably refrain from directly arguing or debating on these topics, but instead use deflection tactics such as referring the questioner to their website, and then they quickly retreat.
Later, when no longer under direct pressure, JWs are likely to replay the difficult challenge over in their mind. If there are no set answers in the Watchtower literature, they are compelled to fabricate a refutation themselves, perhaps by looking for relevant bible verses. The motive for this is often more to reassure themselves than to answer the challenger.
But many times there is no valid refutation. A frequent recourse if they can't find a gratifying way to refute the objection to their religion, is to vilify the character of the challenger, as a means to negate the challenge.
They are then compelled to use flawed logic to find a ‘solution’ to the challenge. Once they have an idea, they cling to it and repeat it, however false or illogical it is, until it becomes an ‘established’ counter argument (at least in their minds).
A classic, often repeated example is as follows. After pointing out a flaw in the Organisation they will reply by saying:-
“Show me an alternative religion that has more truth than ours”........ MaxInDHouse
If their adversary fails or declines to suggest an appropriate alternative religion, the JW erroneously concludes that this is decisive evidence that theirs is the true religion by default....... MaxInDHouse
Many people who have had encounters with Jehovah’s Witnesses will recognise this trait. Very often, when Jehovah’s Witness are confronted with contrary evidence, they simply repeat an invalid point over and over, even though they have been presented with well-founded objections or incontrovertible evidence....... JaNosense and his likes
After several such encounters, Jehovah’s Witnesses begin to have misplaced confidence in their false reasoning, which leads them to the absurd conclusion that their religion is the only one God is backing.
The Watchtower literature is also a factor which builds confidence in JWs that their religion is God’s organisation. The articles repeatedly make the hubristic claim that they are God’s ‘channe[/b]l’, that God is using the ‘Faithful Slave’ to convey his message, etc.
Despite the lack of [b]sufficient evidence, the constant repetition of these claims forms a confirmation bias in the minds of the followers, and these invalid assumptions become an established fact.
One only has to read the posts of many JWs on nairaland to see this process in motion. There are countless answers from JW apologists in which they claim to be God’s people.
Remaining in an environment where this predominant attitude is constantly played out, has convinced millions of followers that their religion is God’s organisation, even though they lack sufficient evidence to back up this baseless claim."
For your reading delight
Almost all christian sect claim Jesus founded their religion, including JWs. We all know it's a claim. Don't blame the JWs, what else do you expect?
MaxInDHouse: Reread Hebrews 1:1-2 it's about how God dealt with people before and after Jesus so if you're still expecting God to come and appear to you after Jesus i'm sorry for you!
I quote Numbers again:
6 He then said: “Hear my words, please. If there was a prophet of Jehovah among you, I would make myself known to him in a vision, and I would speak to him in a dream.
This statement is not subject to Mosaic law bros. God is saying what He does to His prophet. Let's go to Hebrews.
2 Now at the end of these days he has spoken to us by means of a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the systems of things."
I guess the verse 2 is where your point is. Does this mean that God doesn't speak again through visions and dreams? Not at all, Paul who wrote that bible book received visions, as well as other apostles. That is the way God communicated with them, but he does so through his son Jesus. I don't know how you could misread that to mean that God no longer speak to people. Again you haven't brought any valid proof.
So your leader has no authority from God to form a religion. That religion is thus, man-made.
MaxInDHouse: The above quotation is about which nation?
Ọmọ that's the OLD COVENANT in which God used prophets to speak to the nation of Israel {Hebrews 1:1} but at the same time Satan also did exactly the same thing by appearing and speaking to the same prophets God appeared to in dreams and visions. For instance David was a prophet of God used to prophesy about the Christ {Psalm 110:1-3} yet Satan also used David through the same means {2Samuel 24:1; 1Chronicles 21:1} Satan tried the same thing with Jesus, after God's Holy Spirit has taken Jesus into the wilderness to instruct Jesus on how to go about his ministry {Luke 4:1} Satan also disguised as the same spirit {2Corinthians 11:14} to instruct Jesus {Luke 4:3-12} but discovered that unlike David who forgot to rely on what God had said about Abraham's descendants that they will never be counted Jesus relied strictly on the scriptures until Satan unknowingly revealed his identity demanding for worship from Jesus who has always been a worshiper of the true God so Satan got frustrated and left Jesus looking for another opportunity to get back in a subtle manner {Luke 4:13} and he surely did speaking through a trusted disciple of Jesus called Peter! Matthew 16:22-23
So God is no longer using that Old Covenant you're quoting {Jeremiah 31:32-33} rather God's word will be available to everyone that believes {Jeremiah 31:34} and we can all know the truth through the guidance of spiritual Jews {Zechariah 8:23} whom Jesus sent to teach us to become his disciples! Matthew 28:19-20
So if you're banking on people who have seen spirits then you're on your own because you can't distinguish between the spirit of God and Satan, in fact God concluded in the Bible telling us that there's no addition or subtraction {Revelations 22:18-19} which means God won't appear to anyone henceforth whoever wants to know God's organization only need to examine the FRUIT of God's Holy Spirit {Matthew 7:15-20} not GIFTS!
God is saying what he does to His prophets, that's not a law. Haba.
God is saying if there is a prophet, I will appear to the person in dream, vision etc. That's not a mosaic law that passed away. He is saying how he operates with His prophets.
Even though the law has passed, does not the principle still apply? Was it not there that JW borrowed there annual convention and assemblies? Was it not there that you borrowed your family worship practice?
2. It is the book of revelation that God says no addition should be made to it as you quoted. However, is the book of revelation the last book of the bible that was written? So other books written after the book of revelation is now fake?
MaxInDHouse: God told the Israelites that another prophet will come in the manner of Moses {Deuteronomy 18:18} Moses and Jesus were like Gods in the midst of their generation {Exodus 7:1; Isaiah 9:6} both of them were given the power to perform SIGNS as evidence of God's approval regarding their mission.
But when it comes to Jesus' disciples they can only perform SIGNS as long as Jerusalem exists once that city is destroyed with it's temple all supernatural gifts will cease {1Corinthians 13:8-10} so if that's what you're banking on then i pity your condition {Matthew 7:22-23} according to Jesus the FRUIT of God's Holy Spirit (not GIFT) will be the evidence that God is backing a group. Matthew 7:16-18
You didn't get the point. If any is a prophet, see how God make Himself known to that prophet, which shows they have God's approval.
Here He says it:
Numbers 12:6 6 He then said: “Hear my words, please. If there was a prophet of Jehovah among you, I would make myself known to him in a vision, and I would speak to him in a dream.
God do appear to His prophets through dream and visions. He did show vision to John even at his old age, after many years Jerusalem had been destroyed.
Your GB doesn't have such evidence. So God didn't appoint them.
According to apostle Paul whom Jesus used to connect people of all other nations whoever disregards the FRUIT of God's Holy Spirit but is trying to find fault with the group God's is using is deceiving himself!
Of course Gods representatives have fruit of the spirit manifest in them. This was true when God gave them visions and miracles. So those qualities weren't to console them for a claimed cessation.
MaxInDHouse: Why must salvation be through a first century Jewish man called "Jesus"? Why not through your own daddy? Or are you saying your own daddy is evil?
God's plan is that salvation will come through the descendants of Abraham Isaac and Jacob then the child that will be born through that lineage is the wonderful counselor, then a group will emerge as representatives of Jesus {Matthew 24:45} so failure to ACKNOWLEDGE God's plan means you're on your own! Matthew 25:34-46
If you like, ridicule Jesus. He sees all you're saying.
You did well in referencing Isaiah 9:6. But notice what more it says:
6 For a child has been born to us, A son has been given to us; And the rulership will rest on his shoulder. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. NWT
What does eternal father mean to you?
I acknowledge God's plan, but Matt 24:45 is not referring to your GB. For obvious reasons. Jesus evidence for representing God was miracles, your GB doesn't have any miraculous evidence to establish God chose them.
2. During the 1919, Rutherford never saw any group as faithful slave. Rutherford once saw Russell as the slave, later Rutherford saw himself as the slave. So your coming in modern time to assign him and others as the slave is rubbish. The man saw himself alone as the slave.
3. The so called Slave, aka, GB of JWs during Rutherford's time were just Board of Directors of Bible and Tract Society, a corporation. These were appointed through voting, not by any bible principle. Not by any spirit.
4. Your history shows that the president of the corporation was the principal member of the organization. He virtually made the final decision as a president. Other didn't have the same right as him. So actually, there wasn't any group in 1919 that it's members had the same authority as others like it is today.
5. The hypocrisy of your GB is seen in that they say that the Slave comprised of those who prepare and disseminate bible teaching. They attribute this to the GB of the corporation and others who contributed in writing the publication in 1919 and beyond. All of them were part of the 'faithful slave' as the current understanding says. However, they skillfully waved that aspect away when they declared only themselves as the Slave. So their definition of the faithful slave is inconsistent. It means one thing during 1919-1970's and meant another afterward.
So your publications in yester years disagree that any Slave of body of elders were available in 1919. So those who were on hand in 1919 didn't believe they were any Slave.
You're entitled to your beliefs no matter how absurd, but don't use Jesus phrase at Matt 24;45 to refer to group of people who don't even know who Matt 24:45 refers to.
God has a procedure for appointment. Here He says it:
Numbers 12:6 6 He then said: “Hear my words, please. If there was a prophet of Jehovah among you, I would make myself known to him in a vision, and I would speak to him in a dream.
The context is when the appointment of Moses was called into question. God answered and revealed His PROCEDURE for appointment of prophet. But the only exception was Moses.
So this your organization's guesswork interpretation of Matt 24:45 is not the way to know whom God has appointed... There has to be a divine supernatural evidence to establish it. Your guesswork is purely unscriptural. Someone can't just wake up and say 'hey, you know that we have been appointed'. God doesn't work that way.
Janosky: It is not by force to agree with Acts 15:6-15 (& 2 Chronicles 7:14 )confirmed by Jesus Christ followers that they bear Jehovah's name. Isaiah 43:10 (ASV) & 2 Chronicles 7:14 , that is name Jehovah God calls His chosen servants.
You guys have a long way to go. Soon you will appreciate that when the bible says "my name" or "name" referring to God, it doesn't always mean JEHOVAH.
Cti28: Biblically, there is a role for church leadership in the marriages of saints. Paul the Apostle, did a lot in this area. In passages like Romans 7:32, I Cor 7, Ephesians 5:25-33), Paul touches on issues such as the need for marriage, conditions for remarriage, love, care and submission in marriage and even sexual intimacy in marriage.
In Titus 2:3-5, Paul charges older women in the church to teach young ladies on good relationship with their husbands and home-keeping.
Peter in I Peter 3:1-7, offers gives godly and necessary counsel to married couples.
Therefore, it is the divine mandate for church leaders/elders to mentor, support and counsel young people planning to get married and even those who are already married( young or not). The church must be involved in the marriages of the saints through sound teachings and giving help and support whenever it is needed .
Would it be wrong for a church to assign godly, experienced and spiritually mature elders to fulfill this role? I think not. If the role of what some people call the Marriage Committee is restricted to teaching, counselling and guiding couples to have a home that fulfills the will of God, then there is no problem.
But we know what the MC does in many places is the killjoy usurpation of the role of the families of young people and ungodly poking of their noses into the personal affairs of people.
It is important to note that while the Bible has a lot to say on how a Christian home should be, it has no prescription on processes leading to a wedding. The Bible is less concerned on how a man finds a wife, and what mode of wedding a couple adopts.
In the Bible, beyond the admonition for a believer not to marry and unbeliever, our observation is that courtship and wedding matters are private issues. The Bible gives no role to the church or its leadership in deciding, approving, whom a person should marry, how and when to propose marriage, how long a courtship should last, what mode of marriage to adopt, what clothing to use for the marriage, who to join a couple in marriage, and so on.
What is called church marriage is a tradition of men and not a Biblical prescription. A pastor or priest has no divine assignment to conduct any marriage.It amounts to being a busy body when a "church" makes it compulsory for young people to take permission to get married to whomever they choose. It is extra-scriptural. A confused young person who is undecided on how to make a choice in marriage should be allowed to voluntarily reach out to any elder of their choice if they need it.
The true church leadership of today must pay more attention to helping intending couples and the already married, to enjoy bliss, happiness, fulfillment in their homes, than just making rules for young people intending to get married. Too many regulations and rules and unnecessary protocol, have served to dash the hopes of young lovers and would be lovers. Some have been forced into premarital sex. Others have had to tell lies or half-truths to scale the hurdles in place by the denominational leadership.
In a real church, we don't need any rules and guidelines. The scripture is sufficient.
Note, there is no wedding ministry in the church. God does not give crowns to oppressive and dictatorial church "marriage specialists."
Copied.
One thing I have realized is that, a leadership may have a laudable program in place, but some bad eggs will come turn it to something else. Making the program seem ungodly.
What is needed is for the leadership to sanitize the program.
advanceDNA: Sigh..... the brainwashing is deep.....
U have the bible right in front of you... yet someone told u if u dont belong to watch tower u are false .... nd u believe??
It is really deep. How someone with bible will still be told that without a group of men in New York, he can't be saved, he still believe. Even when it is clear that salvation is by faith in Christ. E shock me.
MightySparrow: They preach from the angle of harassment. Theey like to condemn others while they themselves are not perfect or truthful to their teachings. I have a number of them around me. I hate hypocrisy.
You need to hate hypocrisy. Jesus does hate it too. I keep trying to help them see reasons to take it easy with others cos no one can claim perfect knowledge. They just have this superior cap on their heads. It's not healthy at all.
At times though, you don't blame them, blame the leadership. That's what they portray themselves.
Maynman: I saw none of what you wrote there. Screenshot this part “Not in every state. In some states like California, and Florida you can still be charged for manslaughter or murder even under duress.”
So I should have copied that exact statement somewhere and pasted it here? Like seriously?
Maynman: Who gave me the certain rights? If i have freewill i will be FREE TO DO ANYTHING I WILL, without any consequences.
The way you behave in Nigeria is not same with dubai, is that not infringing on my freewill, i have to follow the laws because of the consequences, not that i am voluntarily following it.
Infringing on or limiting your free will, not REMOVING your freewill. You can still do it. You confusing limitation with REMOVING.
Free will is the ABILITY or CAPACITY to make your choice. It means you are not a robot that is being controlled by someone. A robot doesn't have the ability to decide for itself. If you possess the ability to decide, you have free will.
If you act under duress, it means that you were denied the chance to ACT on that ABILITY you already have. It doesn't mean that you lost that ability. In other words, you were not turned into a robot by that duress.
Maynman: Freewill can only be exhibited when there is no restraint of your actions, then we will see how many people are good because it’s good in itself and not because of consequences.
remove heaven and hell, why are you a good person?
Maynman: Been under duress and coercion is consequences for an action, i gave you an example, your money or your life. Any decision you take is not from your freewill, it’s not voluntary.
Please look up the definition of voluntary.
Ok. So then when you act without being under duress, it means you do so of your free will. You agree?
Maynman: Is there a law on the land about killing your fellow man?
Do you know as citizens we have certain rights? Is that not infringing on out freewill then?
Don’t you get it
Ok. You also agree that you have certain rights. If you have rights, can you then say you don't have free will? Will telling you not to go to the other end mean that you no longer have free will?
Self Control is Good ...There is always a line between being Single and Married .
The point is not about Jumping from every lady to another No .
This is it ...A guy who is a Grown up Adult ,Is not yet Married ,You know Marriage today is not only Love ,You got to have some things in place ,No Controversies ...
Now ,The guy has a Female friend,Just one That he dates ,Have Sex with to calm his sexual Desires down,You may want to say he may contact STD well he might be protecting himself but this guy is not married .
Even in the next 5 years he is not sure of Marriage ...
You mean the guy in his 40 years of age should continue to Control himself for the next 5 Years on and on and on Haba !
Well some can do if U can even stay without sex for 30 years don't turn your self to be others ooo
It doesn't cost much to marry. Go to court and sign a register. Finish. God will accept that.
Realistically, it is not easy, but you make such sacrifices because you want to do God's will.
What do you understand by voluntarily? Can you check dictionary for it?
Not in every state. In some states like California, and Florida you can still be charged for manslaughter or murder even under duress. Now I don't know how this concern our discussion. I agree the person didn't act in accord with his will. However you still broke the law. Some laws might excuse you while other others won't.
However, placing a consequence for one's action doesn't mean he is not acting on freewill. Consequences for an action is not being under duress. Being under duress would be when you are forced to move to the other end with the negative consequences. Not when you move there on your own.
From the point you made under the topic, duress, you can then agree that if that individual shoot someone without being under duress, the law will judge him to have done that killing out of freewill, right? So the law outlining the consequences for killing is not seen to be removing your free will. It's only setting a boundary for your freewill.
Deepspirituals: . When is the right time to Urinate ...Is it the time You have the Urge ,Feeling to Urinate Or you just decide to Urinate without Having any Urge or Feelings ?
Wait for the right time to Urinate ...But The feelings and Urge which was not Created by You keeps Coming and disturbing but you are expected not to Urinate when the feelings and Urge comes ,You are told and Warned to only Urinate at the right time ...That is When you Get to your House ,
You are far from your House ,You don't even have Transportation Money to get to your house right now ,There is serious Traffic on the Way ,You are at the Bustop since there is no bus etc Yet You are right there holding your Private parts ,Urine has filled your Bladder sac ,The Urge and Feelings is getting Unbearable ,If care is not taking You.might Pee on your body ..
The Way to your house is Problematic
What is the way out...Na Waooo
Let's be realistic,Objective ...I know we may want to Defend the Holy Books , Religion Laws etc .let's be realistic oooo
Why don't you urinate in your office room or inside a car whenever the urge comes? Why look for convenience?
Get the point, there is a bit of self control needed in all we do. You can't just jump into any lady you see and have sex because you feel the urge. What if after marriage, you get stirred by that beautiful neighbor next door? You go and spank her? Then while coming out you see another curvy girl walking in, then you jump unto her and spank? Haba
The urge was meant to be managed, controlled and used at a reasonable time and with the right person. I mean there has to be that self control.
Maynman: If a thief says your life or your money, whatever option you pick, is it voluntarily? Is it of your own freewill? Or your options are determined by the consequences?
Which ever one you chose is still your choice. You can decide to let them take the money to save your life. Dem no use juju to make you decide am. You made the choice. You still do not understand that definition.
When the Urge to Urinate comes ,You just have to get to Empty your Bladder ,If You fail Urinate and decide to Continue stopping it ,You are in for a serious Health Issues relating to the Bladder .
The Urge to Pass Pupu/ Excreta is also Not Created by you ,The situation can be very Terrible especially when Toilet is Far ..It Becomes Messier when the Pupu is even Liquid LOL .
Those that have Experience this are in a better situation to explain.
The Feeling to Eat is Not Created by You .
The Feelings to Sleep is not Created by You .
Now ..The Urge ,Feelings To have SEX is also not Created by You ,We grow to Discover that a Private Parts Stands Erected ,We grow up to notice the Sexual Feelings ,The Feelings that a soft Private parts when it's being Touched by a female immediatelly Rises .
ABI who Put that feelings in our Body ,A Man Innocently went to Bed ,In the Morning he finds His Rod stands like a Gibraltar Rock . Man ,Woman Might still Exist,Live without Having Such Feelings if It was not Created in him or her .
But the Bible ,Quran says Thou Shall not Commits Fornications.. Anyone that wants to Have sex should go and Marry ,As if You will get Married without a Job ,Money , Apartment.
A man in his 45 Age Rod must stand ,He must have Sexual Feelings ,at least once in a Month ,His Job cannot even feed him not to talk of Marrying ,Na so His Rod ,Urge is on the High Side .
So he must keep Refraining till He marries ...
What a Law ,What a life ,What a Contraption.
Oya Pastors ,Deacons ,SU ,Books Schoolars Come and Enlighten Us oooo.Konji No be Bastard ,It's part of the Body Chemistry ooo.
Make the Creator Kuku remove the Urge and feelings now till Man Go dey Ready to Marry ,ABI which Kain Sufferings be this...self..
Hahahaha God did say you shouldn't have sex na. The feeling are there so you can use it, but He want you to use it the right time, when married. Finish.
Choices that are not determined by prior causes. If you are doing something because of the consequences you are not doing it from freewill, you are only reacting to the consequences.
Hmmm you de wonderful o. This discussion will really take a century to end if you don't understand common definition.
When did prior cause turn to consequences? My brother what that definition is saying is that one's decisions is not based on pre-determination. Eg, you set your alarm to ring by 8pm. If it rings at that time, it did so because of your earlier or prior setup. It didn't ring by its own prompting.
In other words, the definition is saying that if you're not pre-destined, you have free will.
Maynman: Who told mr A and B they have freewill? Even in Nigeria constitution you don’t have freewill, that’s why there are laws and if you break it you will be punished. Nigeria constitution has set up CERTAIN citizen rights.
You have freewill brother. It appears you don't undythe meaning of free will. Let's see what Webster's Dictionary says:
1. voluntary choice or decision. Eg I do this of my own free will
2: freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention.
These are the definition of free will. If you can make a choice without being coded to decide that way, you have free will.
MaxInDHouse: Judging of others is done by people who kill their neighbours so Jesus and his disciples don't judge anyone rather what they often tell people that sound like judgment is this:
We have our God and it's only among us that you can adequately worship our God!
That's exactly what made the Jews hate Jesus, his disciples and Jehovah's Witnesses today!
You judge people based on their own understanding of scripture. You call them false, while you also have false teachings among you. Jesus never taught falsehood all his life. Don't compare yourself with jesus. And what you said above was never said by Jesus.
MightySparrow: As a Christian, in what areas do you disagree with JW's teachings and why?
JWs doesn't need only criticism. They need commendation as well. They have tried to be different from this money hungry General Overseers. They bring their teaching down to their members in a way that is easy for them to understand. They are not economical with what the leadership knows. If in other churches, these books they give free of charge will be sold for big money.
That they misunderstand some scriptures and follow such misunderstanding shouldn't be the only thing we remember. It's true that they too are fathers of criticism, but you don't have to be like them.
I might be wrong, but what I feel they are missing are:
1. Only 144000 will go to heaven.
2. the elders in Jerusalem formed the worldwide ruling body in the first century.
3. Only 144000 are declared righteous, other witnesses remain dead in their sins until after 1000year reign of Christ.
4. All religion are tagged Babylon the Great.
5. Only they will be saved as righteous ones.
6. Their leaders were appointed in 1919 to feed the church.
7. That God empowered miracles had ceased.
8. That they are the only true religion on earth
These and more areas are aspects I think they are missing the mark.
Maynman: You can’t say someone have freewill and you are still the same person punishing them for using that freewill.
No, you get punished if you misuse your freedom. And your misusing it was done freely without being coerced. There are 99% things you could do within your freewill without any punishment, why do the 1% you were restricted from? It means that you FREELY decided to fall into a ditch.
God didn't issue absolute freedom. That would in fact be disastrous and unloving. It means that one might decide to kill another or burn another's building cos he feels it's the right thing.
Courz: They are not Christians. They have made it clear they are not part of Christendom. They have predicted the downfall of Christianity to happen in 1918. They are allergic to Jesus Christ. The Cult has replaced Jesus. Do your findings and then we can have a discussion.
And Yes. It is a Masonic Cult. Their Founder is One. There are also Freemasons in their midst as we speak wearing their Masonic rings. They are called The Anointed. Their Lifestyle is quite different from the rest of the JWs. They are called Freemason JWs. Their identity is supposed to be Hidden. JWs don't know they are Masons. That's how the Cult is designed. A Cult inside a Cult. They are the ones that Consult Fallen Angels to get their doctrines from them for the rest of JWs to consume. That's why they are the Channel of Communication. They call this act Spirit Channelling where they channel spirits in order to receive messages which they in turn compile into JW publications. These Spirit Channelers can be found in the Writing department and other departments in their Headquarters. They use Masonic terminologies and symbols.
All of these things I am telling you took some research to do which they forbid. You and I can't discuss if you haven't researched this Cult from its inception to now. They revealed who they are in their old publications and sometimes today make some statements that also reveal themselves. It's only that JWs are too asleep (due to their brainwashed condition) to understand when they make certain statements about themselves.
This video below is from someone we call an ExBethelite who has worked and lived in their Headquarters at Walkill Bethel in the U.S. He revealed a time when a Masonic family wanted to recruit him into their Coven and they told him exactly how JWs get their doctrines right from the time of their founder Charles Taze Russell. This guy explained how the young guy he met during a JW meeting, was channelling spirits in the Kingdom hall and writing down in a very fast manner symbols and messages he was getting from the Fallen angels.
He is not the only one who has come out to reveal their Occultic side. Some who were members of the Coven and left the Cult revealed the same as well. Which is another reason why JWs are warned to stay away from EXJWs. Because EXJWs know all their secrets when they decide to research them. They don't want their secrets known or else their cover will be blown. So, they call EXJWs Apostates.
It is very possible that what that guy says did happen. It's true that watchtower is so secretive, but no one will say that they officially teach channeling as a doctrine. A religion might have a teaching, while their members will do something else. Right?
JWs are just another denomination with a different theology. Some doctrines might be strange, but that's how they see things. Its true that JWs themselves do this same judging of others, but it's not healthy. There are sincere people in every religion.
Maynman: If anything is illegal, how are you exercising free will?
Free will is when you tell a kid to pick whatever chocolate flavors she likes without consequence of punishment or reward.
When you attach a reward or punishment to it, the kid is not choosing freely, the kid is only reacting to the consequences.
But what if the kid goes on to defecate on the chocolate? Or goes on to pick an orange meant for someone else? Or what if the kid picks the chocolate and inserts it into his anus or poke his eyes with the stick? Will he suffer for it?
Freewill is just right to do whatever you want. That's all. What you do might have consequences, either good or bad. Whichever one you chose, no one force you to do it, you did it of your own volition. That's freewill.
Christianity Etc › Re: Who Is The Founder Of Jehovah’s Witnesses Organization by Sand2022: 7:08pm On Sep 09, 2023
