by AhHah 89 Replies latest watchtower bible
My answers are:
1. yes
2. yes
3. no
4. No, they are under his wrath as they are about to be disciplined by Jehovah for unfaithfulness.
5. No, not under their current leadership.
6. Yes.
7. Yes, all of it.
8. No.
9. Yes, although I believe judgement has already begun with the 'house of God' (1 Peter 4:17)
10. Yes, we are living in the 'last days' of the current 'Jewish' system of things.
bjc
To answer Scorpion's questions...
Which are very thought provoking and soul searching ones to be sure.
<quote>Do you believe one can have a relationship with the true God without having knowledge of the
scriptures? </quote>
Every human on the planet, whether they acknowledge it or not, knows there is a God. Some hide behind atheism in a frantic attempt to fool themselves, but, let's be honest. This was no accident. Having said that, there are some commonalities that all religeous systems share (this is not to say that they are equal, see my previous post for my views on that). For example, the sacrifice of animals to "appease" the creator/ gods. I believe this is an intrinsic understanding of man's inability to save himself.
Psalms 19:1
The heavens are telling of the glory of God;
And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands.
God has declared himself in his creation.
I am no authority on the subject, but I can see how it would be possible, however difficult, for man to know and understand the character of God in his creation. Although I would not recommend it.
God is just and righteous,and his ways are so far above us. I cannot claim to know his mind on this matter.
<quote>Do you believe that Jehovah's Witnesses will be judged adversely by God for believing what the
WT teaches?</quote>
You've really asked some toughies. I don't feel that I can offer a definitive answer to this, not knowing the hearts of those involved. Christ made it abundantly clear that religeon cannot and will not save anyone. Observance of the law is to be done in faith in Christ and in God who sent him as our ransom sacrifice, that we may be found holy and blameless. The law as Paul says, is powerless to make on righteous. However, the WT teaches a corruption of the word of God.
At some level, those teaching this doctrine know that they have willfully altered the word of God for their own benefit, not to bear out the truth. They will be held accountable. As it is written:
Galatians 1:6-9
I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different
gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of
Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to
you, he is to be accursed!As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you
received, he is to be accursed!
I pray that they will come to their senses and receive forgiveness from the God they have misrepresented. I cannot judge the hearts of those who sit in the pews at the Kingdom Halls, but in order to receive salvation, their faith must be in the true Christ, which would mean denying the doctrines of the WT, a religeon built by man.
<quote>Do you believe a Jehovah's Witness can have a good and true relationship with God through his
Son Jesus even though still in the WT?
</quote>
Again, this would mean a denial of the core doctrinal falicies taught by the society. I hope that all who have been blinded will receive true sight.
Now, turn about's fair play... What do you think?
Hello Theophilus.
I am an infrequent poster here but I do enjoy the regulars as they seem to be good hearted and fun bunch.... well most of them. As to your comments about my answers to Ahah regarding progressive revelation and other sacred scripture, we will just have to acknowledge that we are on opposite ends of the spectrum. Quoting one of those texts (the bible) making a case for exclusivity is an example of the very nature of encrusted doctrinalized religion. I guess the only way to really know which of us is closer to the "truth" is to establish a set of objective criteria for testing scripture and apply it to all equally.
Beyond that it's like two kids fighting in a sandbox over plastic toys. I choose not to go there.
I enjoy your enthusiasm and sense of certitude even if your conclusions are dramatically different than mine. I'm curious though that you don't consider yourself "religious". Surely your definition of the term would warrant exploration given the continued references to the bible and what is recognized as christian dogma.
Care to explain?
Carmel
Carmel,
I also have a difficult time trying to reconcile the exclusivity of some religions -- we are right and everyone else is wrong -- we have eternal life and non-believers do not.
Why would God choose to exclude vast portions of the world's population from a relationship or acceptable worship, only because those cultures do not have ready access to the exclusive religion?
Those who believe in Christianity would state (as Theo did) that God will eventually make "The Way" known to every person on the planet so that the true religion, the true God, is obvious to all -- although convincing the world of such would seem difficult. For example, how many Christians would be prepared to abandon their whole concept of God and religion if God suddenly revealed to mankind that Islam is the true faith? Most would not even seriously consider the possibility, let alone accepting it. Would not every faithful religious person think that any miraculous intervention was proof of their own faith?
If religion is more than just salvation (as has been argued recently), if it is about daily spirituality and peace of mind, then it would seem to me all the more unlikely that God would limit this opportunity to only a portion of the world's population. When it comes to thinking about all those billions of Buddhists and Hindus, etc. that are alive right now, most Christians seem to think about them only in terms of whether or not God in his mercy will murder them on judgment day for being unbelievers. What about their day-to-day spirituality, happiness, and peace of mind right now? Why don't they also qualify for his daily blessing? Only because they have never heard of Christ or read the Bible?
I realize that the Bible itself encourages such exclusivity -- the us and them mentality. That is why I have a difficult time accepting all of it as from God. It seems so childish and unloving to me personally. I would think that an all-powerful, loving God should not be so insecure and jealous.
Isn't it possible that God is available to everyone who seeks him, regardless of any belief system that they may or may not be aware of?
Isn't it possible that God blesses the efforts of those sincere individuals to become more spiritual, regardless of their currently limited attempts to know him through any religion? And that their salvation is just as assured as everyone else's?
Isn't it possible that God has not authored the Bible and other holy books -- even though they all contain some truths in common, and may have been written by sincere, God-fearing persons promoting their own concept of God?
Doesn't this more open concept of God allow us to be responsible for our own spirituality and efforts to know God, without the divisive human need to validate our own faith at the expense of condemning the "unbelievers"?
Doesn't this allow God to be responsible for others, while we content ourselves with being responsible only for our own spirituality?
That is just my opinion. I could be wrong. What do you think?
Edited by - AhHAh on 15 October 2000 17:38:27
Edited by - AhHAh on 15 October 2000 18:34:42
Do you agree that two statements that contradict each other cannot both be true?
For instance, if I say a stop sign is red, and you say it is blue, we cannot both be right. We would then have to go to an objective source, say the DMV handbook, or the CALTRANS (in California, Where I am) traffic codes to determine which of us was correct. agreed?
Theo,
Yes, they are either both false or one is true, but two contradictory statements cannot both be true,
unless the truth is a matter of perspective, that is, it is only in the eye of the beholder, versus an independently verifiable truth. To use your example, what if we all perceived color differently, for instance? Objects have no inherent color, only an ability to reflect certain frequencies of light in a given spectrum range. Our ability to interpret that reflection may differ (e.g. color-blind individuals) but that does not change the essence of the object reflecting the light, does it? Another interesting example is the proven relativity of time (Einstein). Time is not a constant even though it seems that way from the limitations of our commonly observable experiences. Time seems to slow down as an object approaches the speed of light.
Wouldn't it seem reasonable for a secure all-powerful and loving God to accept all current limitations of contradictory beliefs from otherwise sincere individuals, knowing that in his due time, he will enlighten such persons, and then refine any errors in our individual concepts or perceived reflections of his essence?
Doesn't this more open concept of God allow us to be responsible for our own spirituality and efforts to know God, without the divisive human need to validate our own faith at the expense of condemning the "unbelievers"?Doesn't this allow God to be responsible for others, while we content ourselves with being responsible only for our own spirituality?
Edited by - AhHAh on 15 October 2000 20:19:17
Edited by - AhHAh on 15 October 2000 21:1:52
Can we agree that there is a God? A creator who made all things and is still active in his creation?
No, I can only agree that the universe seems to have a Creator, for lack of a better explanation. I cannot say that I am currently convinced of any active interest, although that is certainly my sincere hope.
Please see my survey responses and comments.
Edited by - AhHAh on 15 October 2000 20:30:36
Edited by - AhHAh on 16 October 2000 0:9:28
Hello Theo,
Thank you for your answers.
I believe that one can have a good relationship with God without having knowledge of the Bible or having a limited knowledge. There are many who claim to be Christians and have a command of scripture but do not show what they claim to believe in action. I know some individuals that have a very limited knowledge of the Bible but pray and acknowledge that there is a God. They live very clean moral lives and show a deep concern for others as well as their surroundings. It is not that they do not believe in the Bible and what it says, they just do not think it is necessary to know all of what it contains.
As far as Jehovah's Witnesses being judged adversely by God, I am sure many will be, just like many in all religions will, including those that do not adhere to religions. This is something in Gods hands not a belief of men.
As far as a Jehovah's Witness having a good and true relationship with God, I believe it can be so, just as a Catholic or a Mormon can also. I am not God and it is not for me to say who really has a good relationship with God and who does not. I know that there are many false teachings by religious institutes including the ones mentioned above, but the individual that supports these or are a member, at times I believe does not actually adhere to much of what is or was taught, but tries there best to ask God for help and understanding. I believe that God does listen to these ones and does help them at times. I also believe if one does have the facts of what is right and wrong and continues acting upon the wrong or continues in a course of mindless error, they will reap what they sow.
AhHah,
Tell me, what aspects of the universe lead you to believe that there is a creator and what the character of that creator would be.
