Jehovah's Witness History - by Walter Martin
- Thread starter beameup
- Start date
SonOfCaleb
Active member
/thread
I think it's time for a bombing run on this matter. Excellent thread Beamup! Your usage of Old and New Testament scripture puts even the most seasoned Jehovah's Witness to shame. [MENTION=17065]SonOfCaleb[/MENTION] can't keep up and is shown scripturally void here.
You have truly shown a representative of JW.org to be scripturally lazy.
Bravo!
You have truly shown a representative of JW.org to be scripturally lazy.
Bravo!
beameup
New member
The Watchtower Society has predicted (prophecied) Armageddon over 100 times, beginning in 1877.
http://www.bible.ca/Jw-Prophecy.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watch_Tower_Society_unfulfilled_predictions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Jehovah's_Witnesses#Failed_predictions
Each time their prophecy dates pass, they simply make up another excuse.
1878
1880
1881
1891
1906
1910
1914
1915
1917
1918
1920
1921
1925
1926
1928
1932
1935
1940s
1951
1975
2000
http://www.bible.ca/Jw-Prophecy.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watch_Tower_Society_unfulfilled_predictions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Jehovah's_Witnesses#Failed_predictions
Each time their prophecy dates pass, they simply make up another excuse.
1878
1880
1881
1891
1906
1910
1914
1915
1917
1918
1920
1921
1925
1926
1928
1932
1935
1940s
1951
1975
2000
NWL
Active member
People need to stop attacking the messenger and attack the message. All most people do is show videos like this or quote articles that shoot down actions of members of Jehovah's Witnesses.
The message and plain truth of the Bible are irrefutable, our imperfect human members are not.
Attack the message we preach and not us ourselves, all threads like this show is that anti-JW's are incapable of refuting our reasoning and the things we've learnt and thus result to more drastic measures to try and discredit us, so that our simple truth go on ignored.
In regards to the apparent "failed prophecies" that we made, we made no such prophecies. There is a difference in making prophecy and it be proving false (false prophet), and interpreting an already establish prophecy from the bible and your interpretation of that already establish prophecy proving false (false interpretation).
beameup
New member
The videos accurately portray the Watchtower Society's history (information I'm certain that is withheld from new members).
First off, just for starters, "Jehovah" is a Latin bastardization of the Hebrew YHWH (or YHVH) name of God.
So, "Jehovah of the Watchtower" is an accurate descriptive term, used for the video.
PS: Explain to us (using Scripture) that Michael the Archangel later became Jesus and then died as a "ransom" for Adam.
beameup
New member
Who Jesus is matters for eternity. You get the wrong "Jesus" and you end up in a very bad place.
An angel (or archangel) cannot be a "ransom" for a man (Adam). It makes absolutely no "sense" whatsoever. But you are stuck with that, as that is official Watchtower Doctrine. You used deceit to tell me otherwise.
And I don't care what sort of "works" you are doing individually or collectively, because by "works shall no flesh be justified" before God.
It's pretty obvious that you did not watch the video, as he is simply addressing the history of the Watchtower Society. That information is public information, from public records.
I can clearly remember being taught by JW's in my grandmother's living room, back in the late '50s, that Armageddon was coming very soon. I remember being told that all the 144,000 had already been selected, so our hope was to be protected from the soon coming of destruction on earth. Now, that was over 50 years ago.
NWL
Active member
I don't deny that it is of utmost importance to know who Jesus is, what I said however was that it doesn't matter if Jesus is or is not Michael.
That's your own assumption, nowhere in scripture does it state an Angel, in human form of course, would not have been able to be a ransom. If I'm incorrect could you provide me a scripture that states anything at about an angel not being able to provide a ransom? If you can't find one can you admit that this is an assumption on your part to believe such a thing.
I did watch it, near the end of part one he states that JW's have made false prophecies, which isn't the case. Re-watch it if you have to.
And this proves that we're incorrect how?
beameup
New member
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD [YHVH] shall be delivered - Joel 2:32
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord [YHVH] shall be saved. - Acts 2:21 quote of Joel 2:32
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
For whosoever shall call upon the name of the LORD [YHVH] shall be saved. - Romans 10:9-13
Who are you going to call upon to be saved?
Last edited:
NWL
Active member
Firstly, you've inserted the word "Lord" into Joel 2:32 to make it appear as the "Lord Jehovah" to make your argument seem more credible. Don't insert words into scripture especially when your doing trying to make a point/argument unless you have good reason to do so. You did the same thing again in Acts 2:21, the term Jehovah is lacking in NT manuscripts, however, it is a quote from the OT so inserting the name "Jehovah" could be thought as valid. But to again apply both terms "lord Jehovah" instead of one over the other is simply an attempt by you to make the term in the beginning of Romans 10 seem more credible.
Now we get to Romans 10:9 and Romans 10:13. The Lord in v9 is regarding Jesus, the term in v13 is in regards to Jehovah.
Romans 10 is regarding Gods relationship with Israel and how it was lost and how Israel can again get the relatioship back. When we look at Romans 10:1 we can see this context being applied, "Brothers and sisters, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelite is that they may be saved" (Romans 10:1). Now some people claim that the Lord mentioned in Romans 10:13, which is a reference to Jehovah from the OT. The way we know that Jesus is separate from the Jehovah of v13 is by Romans 10:11 that says Jesus was the cornerstone that God laid as mentioned in Romans 10:11, "For the scripture says: “No one who rests his faith on him will be disappointed".Romans 10:11 was taken from Isaiah 28:16 that states:
"..Therefore, this is what the Sovereign LORD says: "Look! I am placing a [Bfoundation stone[/B] in Jerusalem, a firm and tested stone. It is a precious cornerstone that is safe to build on. Whoever believes need never be shaken.."
As we can see Jehovah laid that corner stone and Romans 10:11 states that the cornerstone was Jesus, if Jehovah laid Jesus down as the cornerstone then Jesus can't be the Jehovah mentioned. Jesus isn't the Lord/Jehovah being quoted in Romans 10:13. Since Jesus said he came in his Fathers name (John 5:43) and that by accepting Jesus your accepting his Father Jehovah (John 5:23) since Jesus is a representative of the Father it is Jehovah name you call upon to be saved, doing so through Jesus. Christ himself had to pray to Jehovah in order to be saved, (Hebrews 5:7), setting the example for us.
(Hebrews 5:7) "..During his life on earth, Christ offered up supplications and also petitions, with strong outcries and tears, to the One who was able to save him out of death, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear.."
BTW, you completely ignored my request, a typical tactic people who can't refute plain truths do.
You stated "An angel (or archangel) cannot be a "ransom" for a man (Adam). It makes absolutely no "sense" whatsoever. But you are stuck with that, as that is official Watchtower Doctrine. And I don't care what sort of "works" you are doing individually or collectively, because by "works shall no flesh be justified" before God.
Could you provide some scriptural evidence for what you claimed regarding provisions of a ransom. If you are unable to find an example could you please admit that an angel coming down as perfect Human would not be suited as a ransom when compared to Adam is simply an assumption you dreamed up.
Right Divider
Body part
One of these days, they're going to nail it!
NWL
Active member
Did you even read my last post to you?? I clearly listed how Romans 10:13 was NOT about Jesus otherwise it would contradict Isa 28:16 and Romans 10:11. Please go back and re-read my post to you.
No, the word there for "LORD" was inserted instead of "YHWH", no OT or LXX manuscript have the inscription "LORD YHWH", its only ever "LORD" or "YHWH", one or the other, not both. As you showed LORD = JEHOVAH, thus to show a verse that has LORD YHWH is like saying JEHOVAH JEHOVAH twice, its simply not biblical.
You didn't answer the question I posed, of course you're under no obligation to do so but it just shows that your unwilling and unable to discuss these matters and that your sole intent is to spout indefensible claims as an attempt to discredit and put down.
KingdomRose
New member
Re. beameup's post #9.....You are a repulsive maggot to denigrate the name of God the way you do. What do you say about the "Latin bastardization" of the name of God's Son? You have no problem saying "Jesus" do you? That is just as inaccurate as the Latin pronunciation of God's name, if you insist on looking at it that way.
It has been explained over and over again why Michael should be considered the same person as Jesus, and how Jesus was a ransom for the results of Adam's sin. You really don't want the answers, or you would have been apprised by now.
It has been explained over and over again why Michael should be considered the same person as Jesus, and how Jesus was a ransom for the results of Adam's sin. You really don't want the answers, or you would have been apprised by now.