12 comments

• 

  channelofhealing

  1 year ago

  Umm will wait for the next part , insightful posts.. although I do know about the Jehova Witnesses in my area that when we are about to pray the keep their eyes open instaed of closing them.
  
  Godbless
  reply
• 

  Sicarii

  1 year ago

  Great series, Dan! It gives a very good insight into what the JW actually believe. I didn't really study what they beileve in, so this is great education.
  
  I had a JW mate during Basic Military Training. Somehow he decided to enlist, but when it came to the presentation of the rifles (the trust M16), he declined and had to serve 7 years in the detention barracks (our term for the military prison here).
  
  God bless, and Shalom!
  reply
• 

  Hopeful Spirit

  1 year ago

  The hypocrisy is magnified when you discover how many of the JW's WORK for the government on every level. They are happy to "feed from the public trough," reaping health care and pension benefits, just to name a few. But then won't serve in the military to defend the privileges that they enjoy on a daily basis. Indeed, they live off the taxpayers who send THEIR sons and daughters to die for America.
  
  Can you tell that it makes my blood boil?
  reply
• 

  FishHawk

  1 year ago

  The depth of explanation is most impressive; and it is good to see something through you on this site again. I was afraid that you may have been struck down for reading what I sent you. Hope to hear back from you soon.
  reply
• 

  theistichedonist

  1 year ago

  Dan-
  Great post! You seem to be a sharp interpreter of Scripture. I have recently posted a review on a portion of chapter 5 of the WT publication, "What Does the Bible Really Teach" (regarding the Fall and Ransom) http://theistichedonist.blogspot.com/ The post is titled, "Witnessing to the Witnesses". My overall aim was to examine how the WT view of the Fall focuses solely on what Adam lost while neglecting any discussion of what God lost. I would appreciate it if you could bust out your exegetical skills and offer a critique of the article! Thank-you!
  reply
• 

  BibleDude

  1 year ago

  Thanks for the encouragement regarding my efforts to discover and expose the false doctrines of the Jehovah's Witness organization! It has been wonderful and quite eye-opening to explore this belief system, and I am glad to see that people are benefiting from my research in the area.
  reply
• 

  Alexander

  1 year ago

  You are a coward, and a bad writer. The above example makes it scriptural, and words like "apparent", "aside from my beliefs", "i believe" don't really make a case.
  
  Quote:
  My first response to this is in regards to the apparent hypocrisy that this displays. And aside from my beliefs on government, I believe that this type of hypocrisy is anti-scriptural. A word study on the word hypocrite shows exactly how Jesus felt about this type of behavior.
  
  In two lines, why you should bury your head under the ground.
  Paul himself went to court in Rome.
  Yet he did prison time for not obeying Rome when he obeyed God's law above all.
  
  Now in your logic:
  My first response to your statement in regards to the apparent hypocrisy that you display. And aside from my beliefs on scripture, I believe that your kind of hypocrisy is idiocy. A word study on the word idiocy shows exactly how God feels about this type of person.
  reply
• 

  Alexander

  1 year ago

  i'm sorry about calling you a coward, idiot and hypocrite. i can't stand injustice, it's a family trait .. i get really edgy. you can cancel my comment if you like
  reply
• 

  BibleDude

  1 year ago

  Alexander,
  I accept your apology, but also recognize that you are entitled to your opinion. I don't expect everyone to like me, but I do study this stuff alot, and am also entitled to my opinion. It is what it is, and I understand that you don't have to agree with it.
  
  Regarding my writing in this post, it is my opinion, which is why I use statements like "I believe", etc. I am not trying to make a case that one side is right and the other wrong. I am simply sharing my understanding and interpretation of the Scriptures. I also believe that just because Paul went to prison like he did, that this nullifies the point that I was making. People are persecuted every day for standing up for Christ.
  
  I guess another point that I could make is around a prayer of Jesus where he stated that we not be separated from the world, but protected from the evil one. I guess I just believe that there is more Scriptural support for embracing the government that God has ordained, than there is to separate from it (where it is convenient).
  
  I take it that from the nature of your comments that you are Jehovah's Witness yourself. If this is the case, then I encourage you to read the entire series, especially the last post which really clarifies what my heart is with this. I don't encourage you to sway you from your beliefs, but just so that you better understand what I am trying to communicate.
  
  I also refuse to remove your comments, because I would hate to be the kind of guy that simply censors out what he doesn't like. While I do not like being called names, I really respect your right to express yourself. I do however feel that it is rude to walk into someone's house and start insulting them. It is my hope and prayer that God releases you from that hostility.
  
  I am happy to continue this conversation if you are willing to.
  
  Dan
  reply
• 

  Alexander

  1 year ago

  It was a mistake from my part to comment like that, but the logic behind my case stands firm. But please don't try to be all sweet and sugar. You were not sweet and sugar to use words like hypocrite in your original post in conjunction with "your opinion" arguments. Let's just stick to the logic and as for the other part, I apologized for that, and I meant it.
  
  I am not representative for Jehovah's Witnesses or what they believe. Only the governing body can help you there, and if you seek answer to questions from them, you should write them directly so they may answer you. I am just another imperfect person with some knowledge of the bible. What I'm writing is not that important and it's certainly not flawless.
  
  Still i disagree with you.
  
  Jesus and Peter clearly demonstrated what it means to submit to government. It means doing everything they ask as long as it doesn't conflict directly with god-given commands. If there is a gray area .. then the decision should be made on a bible-trained conscience foundation, with respect to a person's free will.
  
  Clearly that applies to refusing militairy service where killing is involved, and to a conscience matter where accepting alternative duty is involved (such as administration or red cross)
  
  Early christians did NOT respect a government ban to stop preaching because it was in direct conflict with Jesus' command to go and make disciples out of all nations of the world, and preaching the kingdom of God.
  
  Paul was in jail for similar reasons, and yet used the system in place by going to court.
  
  Jesus prayer you mention further confirm what I argue. You said: "I guess another point that I could make is around a prayer of Jesus where he stated that we not be separated from the world, but protected from the evil one."
  
  This means in one aspect that Christians should seek to be good citizens, as Jesus demonstrated, paying taxes - even if they seem unreasonable. Another theme from what Jesus said is repeated in various instances too: we should not ask God to take away our trials, but instead for his support to be able to stand firm in our trial. Reward is ultimately in a future 'paradise' - yet also protection from harmful practices in our current life that contradict with godly wisdom. (such as smoking, etc)
  
  An example is Lot - he was a servant of God in an immoral enviroment. He was trading and interacting with the people around him - yet he also was not part of the immoral world around him, since God chose to save him and his daughters. This indicates he did not forsake his principles.
  
  An example is Job - God did not take away his trials - allowed him to stand firm despite problems and prove his faith.
  
  An example is Noach.
  
  God does not take away trial, he helps us endure it. Read Jacob 1st chapter for insight on this matter. It's beautiful. He was a half brother of Jesus.
  
  As a nation, it was different for Israel, and it should be different for gods people as a nation in todays day. Israel had to separate themself from the '"world'" .. have nothing in common with people who worshipped Baal etc.
  
  However when Jesus lived, he lived in a Roman province. He taught us to respect the law, because our kingdom is no longer of this world. Christians should be members of Gods Kingdom, and see God as the ultimate ruler.
  
  Whatever time is left for earthly kingdom is temporary .. as Daniel propheticed to Nebuchanezar. It's all until God's Kingdom replaces them. Jesus prayed for this (mat 6) A good example for you to read is how the young jews refused to eat the Babylonian food, yet Daniel was able to cooperate with the king!! The point is to stand up for your belief, not cowardly, when an issue is pressed that you can not bring in agreement with your conscience. By being good citizens otherwise, we can gain support for our consciencious objections, and praise God's name because we follow Jesus' example.
  
  What i'm saying is: the bible is consistent. God allows these Caesars in relative power.
  
  My point was already made with Paul in my initial post. Yes he did what he did. But the point is his example is in the inspired word of God, as an example for Christians.
  reply
• 

  Alexander

  1 year ago

  If you are a woman and your husband tells you to hit your kids so hard that they turn blue if they disobey, would you do it just because the bible hammers on the fact that woman should be obedient to their husbands? Of course not! In this case, Caesar's law is bigger, and in a court she would receive punishment for acting upon her husbands command.
  Yet would she be hypocritical because she pleads with her husband for a mild solution? Of course this does not conflict with anything! She will try to get her husband stray from something bad, so that she may both obey Caesar AND her husband eventually.
  
  Similarly, Christians try to obey Caesar to the best of their ability, without straying from the bigger law. (such as: you won't kill)
  
  ps: even if you killed people in the military, it doesn't matter, because the past is the past, and you can not be held accountable for not knowing something. it's like a kid doing something bad without understanding why. when they are grown up nobody will blame that adult for it, because they accept that every person goes through a learning process.
  reply
• 

  slaveofone

  1 year ago

  If what you describe is correct, then in many ways, my tradition is very similar. I am Anabaptist. In our fold are Quakers, Amish, Mennonites, and many others. Two core concepts of our tradition is that the kingdom of YHWH is not political/is not worldly and another is that violence and war are anathema to Christ, God, and faith. Traditionally, therefore, we refuse military service since we are commanded to love our enemies and loving them can in no way be equated with slaughtering them. Traditionally, many have refused to pay taxes because they believe war is against the will of God and therefore they will not, out of their obedience to God, monetarily support it. Some parts of this tradition, like the Amish, have separated themselves completely from government and society so that they have no dependence on the nation or world. It is not uncommon for people all across my tradition to shun allegiance to the flag. This doesn’t mean people are always politically neutral. For instance, my congregation has marched every year against the war in Iraq since it began. This is a political statement to the world. However, our goal is not so much to take a political stance as to be in obedience to Christ and to tell the world to join us in following him.
  
  “Jehovah’s Witness seem to demand the freedoms and benefits that government provides, while refusing to put in the effort that is required to maintain the governmental system that provides these things in the first place. My first response to this is in regards to the apparent hypocrisy that this displays.”
  
  Why do you call it hypocrisy? If anything, they are being extremely consistent, for they have refused to identify themselves with the country and have taken the necessary steps to disengage themselves from it in those ways that they can. Just because they happen to be born in this country and probably don’t have the money or means to leave it doesn’t mean they should therefore simply let the country roll over them and destroy them if the country also provides means for them to stay and to prosper in it if they work with that system for their benefit and not for the country.
  
  "However, at a slightly deeper level, this passage indicates that even the earthly governement [sic] is an extension of God’s authority. Therefore the idea that the Jehovah’s Witness submit themselves to the rule of God’s government, and not the earthly government is flawed."
  
  You are splitting hairs. You are also committing an interpretational flaw in that you are taking bits and pieces of verses and turning them into universal morals/ethics as if Yeshua or Paul were a Greek Cynics or Hellenistic philosophers expounding absolute verities. But Paul and Yeshua weren’t—they were Jews—and they didn’t—they spoke about what it means to be a people of the covenant god in a world ruled by godless men.
  
  "Furthermore, the interpretation of John 18:36 is really misused as a command to not participate with the military. The first problem in this interpretation is that it is based on a narrative of a conversation that Jesus had. Jesus was not literally teaching in this passage that people should not serve in the military, but He was declaring where His authority and power comes from."
  
  Suddenly now you’re not interested in turning things into universal truths and moral verities? Suddenly now you realize there’s a narrative with time and place and context involved? Why the flip-flop? Who’s the hypocrite now?
  
  "Regardless of what you believe a person’s role (especially a Christian’s) should be in government, it is clear that this core belief an practice of the Jehovah’s Witness organization is incorrect."
  
  I don’t see this as being obvious…and I think you’ve done a rather poor job at saying so if you think otherwise…
  
  "I further believe that there are few things that one can do to honor God more than taking an active role in the systems and structures that HE established, and commands us to submit ourselves to."
  
  God commands us to get involved in our military and to go to war to kill and shed blood for the godless rulers of our country? Good luck with that one.
  
  "One cannot pick and choose which parts of government that they like"
  
  Why not?
  
  "just as one cannot pick and choose which parts of the Bible they want to believe in…"
  
  Yet you have done such a good job so far in this post doing that exact thing... Regardless, this is a straw man argument that has nothing to do with the subject matter.
  reply