Jehovah Witnesses

I see them around and i want know if anyone over here has any doubts or knows anything that is bad about these ppl.

theres nothing wrong with this religion. just leave them alone, and stop being such a fucking prick.

"do you know anything bad about this religion".....

idiot.

they follow the bible more closley than most religions. and the reason they go around knocking on your doors is because jesus gave the command to "go and make disciples in my name".....

[Clarphimous]

Here are some nice sources for you.

http:../../www.jwfiles.com/default.htm http:../../www.silentlambs.org/default.htm http:../../www.thetablet.co.uk/cgi-bin/a...i@tablet-00577 http:../../watchtower.observer.org/default.htm http:../../www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/27.htm http:../../www.focusonthefaulty.com/pages/jehovahs.html

[Craftian]

Decent people I guess, but they're at the far end of the weird scale.

from what i understand of the religion, theyre more closely related to judaism than christianity.

[bkc]

Used to be a Jehovah's Witness

Why did you get out?

[bkc]

quote:Originally posted by YupThisAlex:

Why did you get out?

Well, when we first started in the mid 80's, they explained things from the bible in a very logical way, that answered questions that other religions didn't answer, and they also exposed false beliefs that other religions had about the bible, or that didn't make sense, like the stuff about burning in hell. They got you in with this kind of material and solid bible study. Learned a lot about the bible.

But then after they get you in and you are devoted to them and think they must be right about everything, then the focus changes to controlling you behavior and life. And then you eventually start to notice that their biblical conclusions contain some possible contradictions. But you have invested a lot emotionally by that time, and you have a lot of good friends that you can't talk to about this stuff. So this goes on for a few years and then you eventually decide you are just going to have to break with it.

"And then you eventually start to notice that their biblical conclusions contain some possible contradictions."

Can you be more specific.

[bkc]

I could be specific as you want. The main one might have been that they said the Watchtower was the "faithful and discreet slave" as described in Matt 24 (I think). Basically this was like them making the argument that they could make no mistakes and that they were an intermediary to get to God. The same thing in effect the pope is claiming.

quote:Originally posted by bkc:

I could be specific as you want. The main one might have been that they said the Watchtower was the "faithful and discreet slave" as described in Matt 24 (I think). Basically this was like them making the argument that they could make no mistakes and that they were an intermediary to get to God. The same thing in effect the pope is claiming.

well if god does have a religious organisation he approves of on this planet...then he would have some kind of prophets wouldnt he??

all through biblical history there has been prophets-so why wouldnt he use them now to allow us to learn the real meaning of the bible-in the bible the only prophet who didnt make a mistake was jesus. obviously no man is going to be perfect, so as humans a prophet can make a mistake, but what a prophet cant do wrong is speak gods word wrong, as it would be inspired by god.

so if they beleive they are the faithfull and discreet slave...and what they explain from the bible has no error-then they are gods emmisaries/prophets...

obviously your going to know the religion better than i do, but thats what i think anyway.

[bkc]

You did a very good job of summarizing maybe the way they would explain it. Thats why it was difficult to break with them. They had very reasonable arguments.

There are some problems though with your theory about prophets I think. Yes God would have prophets that would speak the word of God. But really what they are doing is speaking ABOUT the word of God. This means that their words, or the words in the bible, are NOT the word of God, but ABOUT the word of God. For instance, if you find a sentence in the bible that says "Good people do blank", if you think the words in the bible ARE the word of God, then this sentence has to become an absolute truth to you.

The problem with this, is that anything that is an absolute truth now has equal standing with God, because there is no fault in it, just like there is no fault in God. Once you find ONE thing other than God that has no fault, then that means there must also be OTHER things beyond that that have no fault. Then you will have two things, then three, and on and on.

These are what the bible refers to as idols actually, though we are used to thinking of idols as statues or something, which they can be also.

Also I think it may be a mistake to equate the word "perfect" with mistakelessness. One reason I say this, is that I could make the argument that I make no mistakes, because from a longterm point of view everything I do is eventually going to turn out "good".

Gods real word cannot be spoken wrong because it is only one thing. Words about the Word can lead us more, or less, to the Word, and can be judged as more or less wrong in that sense.

You can easily argue, to take another point of view, that Jesus spoke wrong words because there has continued to be pain and suffering in the world AFTER he spoke his words.

So any time someone, or something, or somewords, are thought to be without fault, it is a red light that tells you that that thinker worships more than one God, no matter what his claim is.

[This message has been edited by bkc (edited 05-18-2004).]

[bkc]

Out till Fri (if anyone cares)

i had a buddy who was a jehova. when his pastor caught him smoking [the guy was 20 at the time] he barred him from church till we was willing to make an apology, and asked all members of the church, including his family, to not talk to him until he did.

he ended up just leaving the church.

Jehovah Witnesses.

SwIm remembers something about if a male (JW) marries and she(also JW) has not concieved within a year then the father in law gets the go ahead to concieve a baby with her instead.

And the Mormans, Ask them about their 'magic underpants'