And yet, somehow, the Papacy came into power and held power over the followers of Jesus for not just years but for centuries.

Was Luther right to stand up against what he believed was a serious travesty against the Bible concerning the ordinance of indulgences, if I remember correctly?

If Luther had followed the Watchtower's direction, and simply waited on Jehovah, I believe we would be living in a very different world. Sure, at some point someone would've enough and stood up. Maybe. All we know is that someone took a stand against the Roman Catholic Church and later others did the same. Should they have "waited on Jehovah" instead?

And what would you have those who would listen to you do?

If others are edified and have their faith bolstered, then I support their efforts just as I do those among other Christian groups who find themselves moved to stand against teachings or policies which deviate from those in harmony with the established record and history of the movement. We can get through this, but it is going to require all of us.

~~Earthbound

 

The papacy came into power. ok?

Who cares if Luther was right or wrong. That has nothing to do with us.

Stop putting your trust in men and bringing up the examples of people who believed in pagan doctrines. You make one point about being content with the current system, then you reverse and make a point about standing up for the truth, make up your mind. Are you against the current teaching of the Watchtower or not? Or are you one of those who know it's wrong and won't do anything about it? Faith without works is dead, and we are to renounce people who teach heresy.

You are wrong for supporting edification of faith when the faith is a lie. That is not what Jesus taught, there is only one truth. These who are being misled need to hear the truth.

You idea of waiting on Jehovah is different from the Bible's, we should wait on Jehovah, yes. That is not an excuse to be a coward and hide from those who will persecute you for preaching the truth. Faith without works is dead, so we shouldn't preach and just wait for Jehovah? I wait for Jehovah and still carry out a ministry. What should someone do if they realize 1914 is false? What does the Bible say? Preach. Why is this is so hard to understand?

Micah 7:5-8 ESV
Put no trust in a neighbor; have no confidence in a friend;

Jeremiah 17:5-6 ESV
Thus says the Lord: “Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart turns away from the Lord. He is like a shrub in the desert, and shall not see any good come. He shall dwell in the parched places of the wilderness, in an uninhabited salt land.

Jeremiah 9:4 ESV
Let everyone beware of his neighbor, and put no trust in any brother, for every brother is a deceiver, and every neighbor goes about as a slanderer.

 

Um, okay?

If you feel teachings like 1914 are salvational issues, then you are certainly free to address those with the Watchtower organization and those who support those beliefs. I'm just not interested in joining in your cause and becoming an activist with you.

I don't see the 1914 dogma as a salvational matter— a problem, yes, but that's for the Watchtower organization to sort out as the years press on and their former prophetic interpretations go unrealized. I see no grounds to dismiss Jehovah's Witnesses as fellow followers of Jesus because they have a particular interpretation of Revelation and 1914. Pretty much everyone has something to say about the Revelation of Jesus Christ. And everyone has an opinion. That's about the time when you see Christians start arguing that they can't all be right, so which one of them is the right one— all the while never stopping to entertain the reality that they are all wrong to varying degrees. It just so happens that the Watchtower was very free with their building up Witnesses to a crescendo of excitement, only to see hope postponed and brothers and sisters stumble, over the last century.

I'm sorry you see the world so black and white, but I'm happy you have found a perfect religion with no flaws and no need for any future adjustments or correction.

The last I knew, the Watchtower promulgated the view that members are to wait on Jehovah when they feel a change needs to be made in the organization or its published views. That is the "wait on Jehovah" policy I was alluding to here, and is not to be taken that I feel their application of the policy is healthy.

~~Earthbound

 

I never asked you to join.

You are like the rest of them, you have your opinions and don't care if they contradict Bible scriptures. Like those seeking blood reformation, the issue is very clear, abstain from Blood. The thing is, 2 Thessalonians 2 has said it is a salvational issue, whether you like it or not. Teaching and believing a false parousia WILL cost you your life in the end, or is 2 Thessalonians 2 just an opinion? You have a lot of opinions yet never quote the Bible.

The Bible is black and white. Good vs. Evil, falsity vs. truth. You cannot sit at the table of demons and Jehovah's. Or is there a kids table where the grey ones can sit?

I never dismissed Jehovah's Witnesses. If you would read the scriptures I have cited, you would understand, that this man of Lawlessness only appears in God's Temple (people). So how can I dismiss JWs if they are God's Temple?

Right, wait on Jehovah. If you read 2 Thessalonians 2, you'll see exactly how handles this false parousia. But in the mean time, since you are so content with the way things are ran and happy doing nothing, do me a favor and refrain from sharing your apathy around. It's all good here with Earthbound, God won't punish those who worhsip graven images, pagan trinities, believe in false parousias, you just keep doing what you are doing, it's okay as long as we have faith. But Acts has clearly said Jehovah is no longer overlooking ignorance. And what did Revelation say about those perishing? Right, they were wicked and didn't know him. He who imagines peace with God is a fool.

I'm not telling you to accept anything I say. But you come here with the globalist view that all religions and beliefs are accepted by God as long as they believe in him. That is factually false.

 

At the moment, it matters not what you believe as a JW. But you already know, that as we get closer to the end, 2 Thessalonians 2 has said those who don't want an accurate knowledge and believe their false parousia, will perish and not be saved. So don't ignore this fact.

But if you refuse to listen now, and don't come to an accurate knowledge regarding Christ. How on Earth do you expect to be saved and make the right decisions when the stumbling block so great comes, that if it were possible even the chosen ones would be misled?

The problem is, Jehovah's Witnesses are believing and teaching a lie. The Divisions are caused by them when they refuse to listen to what the Bible really teaches. Didn't Jesus say he came to cause Division not peace? You are quoting the scripture out of context, if we were all knew the truth 100% then the one causing divisions should be done away with. But how many times did Paul cause division when it came to correcting the congregations and circumcision debates? Should he have ran away like a Coward in order to prevent division and let them go on in their unrighteousness? Who caused the division? Was it the men deviating from the truth or Paul? Lets assume Paul was outnumbered, would you say he caused the division?

Jesus didn't come to create peace. He didn't concern himself with the opinions of others. He said that fathers would be betrayed by sons because of his name.

Is it not Prophesied that our brothers will hate is because of Jesus' name?

 

Amen Joshua Amen, Let us grow in Love not in Judgment, Regent

 

So let me ask you, what is your stance on Perimeno and e-watchman then? Didn't you say you learned TTATT through them? Why would they get a pass and the rest don't?

 

No religion is acceptable in Jehovah's eyes, Christ did not give his life for a Religion but for sinners that will repent and tremble at God's Word's. Ac:2:37,38 - Isa:66:2 - Christian Love to you BTW and to all, Even my enemies. Regent

 

I know they are not.

 

Pass, like allowed, acceptance, granted entry.

 

Wait, now you have to tell me what happened.

 

What Happened with these Public figures?

 

Just making a general comment here:

The forum is made up of brothers/sisters who are from all walks of life. Some still attend at the hall, some are in the "wilderness," figuratively speaking. Others have disassociated and others have been disfellowshipped. Myself, I'm a "satellite sister" - I still go to the hall, but I'm considered to be "persona non grata" and aren't included in anyone's clique.

I'm familiar with the corruption within the Watchtower Society. I follow their legal and financial matters with a lot of interest. I think that there are interesting times ahead for the Australian Bethel Branch, following the conclusion of the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Child Abuse. To me, it's like watching a train wreck happen in slow motion. First, there was the court case involving Steven Unthank v Traralgon Congregation, State of Victoria, Australia. Next came the Inquiry into Child Abuse within the State of Victoria, Australia. This was followed with the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Child Abuse.

Some brothers/sisters are aware of these matters but don't discuss them openly. Others have heard second-hand information about the Royal Commission. I'm not sure if these brothers/sisters are prepared for anything to happen to the Watchtower Society. When prophecy doesn't get fulfilled in the way that they have been led to believe, I think that there are going to be some very confused brothers/sisters, whose faith will need strengthening.

There are no Witnesses in my family. I can leave any time I want. But my goal is to help the brothers/sisters understand what is happening when the Watchtower Society collapses. If I'm disfellowshipped or I disassociate, they won't listen to me. That's my personal decision only. Each person here has their own choice in this matter - whether they will go or whether they will stay. It's a personal decision.

I'm hoping that brothers/sisters on this forum, regardless of their situation, can be a source of encouragement to others who are reading here. Some brothers/sisters may read here and they might have questions about the Watchtower Society. I hope that we can strengthen each other and strengthen the faith of those who read here.

 

Yes, but this is a personal commitment and decision in accordance with their God-trained conscience. The Watchtower has made it an organizational commitment, a touchstone, if you will, as to one's loyalty to the organization's established values and interpretations and opinions.

I believe that the Father I have come to know in my 43-or-so years walking as a believer is more interested in life than He is in martyrs. (Cf Isaiah 1:17)

Let's say that I know someone who "took blood," as I would hear others say in the organization. Or maybe they were parents making the decision as they stood over the motionless body of their child lying in bed and only moments to decide.

Is it my place as a follower of Jesus to condemn this man or those parents for "taking blood?" Am I to view them as condemned before our Father as the Watchtower asserts such ones become? Is he not my brother, united through our Mediator with our heavenly Father, Jehovah? Am I not his keeper?

If anything, because of my love for this brother or those parents, I want to be there with them and constantly pleading that Jehovah not hold this against them, insisting that if He is going to, then let me stand in their stead because I personally understand what it is to be weak in both great matters as well as small!

Now, having said all of that, I still firmly believe that one is to make an informed decision regarding the taking of blood into the body. The Watchtower organization has done a remarkable job in this regard, and I continue to commend those taking the lead in this matter.

I've had several major surgeries over the last several years, the first of which I was already at death's door. My wife and I had discussed each other's position on blood well before this all began, so it wasn't a matter of worry when the emergency struck me.

In my case, the order goes this way: saline solution, plasma, and only after all else fails, then I give consent for blood to be introduced.

I am the primary earner of our family, so my decision is simply for what I perceive is my responsibility to my wife and those who depend on me financially. Dying would throw them into an unnecessary financial distress, which would then impact numerous other things. The decision had nothing to do with trying to offend Jehovah, nor was it for selfish reasons. But I trust Jesus will take all factors into consideration with the added benefit of looking upon my heart and the inclination thereof. And whatever my intentions, it doesn't prevent or stand in the way of the risks associated with using blood in medical treatments. I just felt that the necessity outweighed the risks. Just like the meds I have to take now provide greater benefits than risks.

It's a decision most Christians have never had to face, thankfully.

My apologies in not citing scriptural references, but rather alluding to them and taking for granted that the reference will call to everyone's mind the scriptures I was including in a point I was making. I will work on this, for sure.

As to the subject of the "man of lawlessness," wouldn't that be more appropriate in a separate topic from one that was intended to discuss the existence of schisms among the followers of Jesus and what their existence helps manifest among those followers? Or is there an ongoing discussion somewhere? Just for the record, it is my understanding that the apostle Paul wrote those words concerning the coming Judgment upon Jerusalem, and therefore has no latter-day application. But again, that is a topic for a different place than this one.

The Bible may be black and white, but humans are not.

Noah walked with Jehovah God and built an ark under the most ludricous of notions: a flood that would destroy humankind. Out of all of the families alive in his day, his was the one which Jehovah saw fit to carry into a rinsed-off earth— and Noah offers up a sacrifice to Jehovah as recognition of Jehovah's hand in their salvation, which Jehovah stamps the rainbow on. And then Noah gets drunk, apparently some believe that he was then sodomized by one of his sons... and this was the best Jehovah could come up with to start humankind over with?

Or Abraham. It took a ridiculous amount of faith for him to leave his homeland and take his family and servants with him. It fell on him whatever would come now, for they had placed their trust in him and his faith. He went so far as to lay the blade to the throat of his son, his only son, to prove his faithfulfulness. But this is the same man who lied to save his own skin and offered up his own wife to save his own skin.

David, remembered as Jehovah's friend, had someone killed to cover up his own grievous act before Jehovah!

Humans are not black and white by any stretch of the imagination! We are all broken and none of us stands above another when we're all kneeling before our Messiah-King and Judge.

Again, shouldn't the subject of the "man of lawlessness" be better discussed in a separate, focused topic? And I do not share in the view that Jehovah's Witnesses are God's Temple in an exclusive sense, sorry. But I can go into that more if you start up a topic.

My view is that when someone makes the decision to follow Jesus, becoming a believer in the process, they are submitting their lives to serving as a vessel through which others might be blessed and give glory to our Father who lives in the heavens, even when they do not know him as well as they will in due course. They are placing themselves under the authority and governship of Jesus as head of the body of Christ, and consenting to examination and judgment.

When that follower comes to congregate with others of like faith and they form a group, representing themselves as Christians to onlookers, they are consenting to a greater accountability before Jesus as a community, while at the same time the group becomes a protection for each individual believer, all of them trusting the others to keep watch, should an individual become spiritually sick or stumble.

But I want to reiterate that any judgment associated with that individual once they assert to being a follower is best left to his Master. Jesus knows who his sheep are, and one of the more difficult concepts for Jehovah's Witnesses, in my experience, is that there are sheep just as scattered among the other Christian groups out there as there are those among Jehovah's Witnesses who struggle with certain doctrines, interpretations, and application of scriptures.

And no, I actually believe none of man's religions and organizations are acceptable to Him, but they are a means to the end just as the Temple was allowed to remain until it had served Jehovah's purpose.

I also try to keep in mind that the Day of the Lord in 70CE was against Jerusalem and the Temple cult, and not to wipe out Jews. Those who were trapped inside Jerusalem when Rome laid siege probably had little idea of the political intrigues that Jehovah was bringing judgment against. They were there for the observance from distances that were measured in days by foot. And they were collateral damage in the conflict between Jehovah and the wicked leaders of His people, which leads me to believe they will see a resurrection.

~~Earthbound

 

I'm not going to judge you. You took blood, ok. That is between you and Jehovah. Not my business.