Facebook evangelising

by jhine 21 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • steve2

    An interesting Facebook meme. So JWs claim Jesus made his father’s literal name known - yet scripture shows he seldom used the literal name. Even in the Lord’s Prayer, while he says “Let your name be sanctified”, he still addressed God as “Our Father”. In their book, Aid to Bible understanding, they acknowledge that the word “name” can denote someone’s reputation, not necessarily the literal name. So Jesus made God’s plan and will known - which entails the divine reputation. In that sense, he made God’s name known.

    Moreover, if JW organization was truly interested in the literal truth - and not just organization’s dogma - it would have taught, used and promoted the closest approximation of the divine name known, Yahweh. They could have easily accomplished this, given their vast printing and preaching reserves. However, there was no organisational will to do this. Talk about the misnomer in claiming to be a people for his name.

  • Ding

    Sometimes all JWs do is cut and paste from the Reasoning book or some WT article, post it, and move on.

    There's no indication that they read any of the responses.

  • jhine

    Hi Ding , you can't see it on the link but l did point out to my "friend " that the Tetragrammaton was never in the NT and that the word Jehovah was coined by a Spanish Catholic Monk a few hundred years ago . Clearly she did read my response because she came back with ...... l have just tried to find it and can't . Another JW had put some comments on and l repeated my refutation and asked if they had permission from the GB to be posting this .

    l will continue to look for the posts but l wonder if they have been withdrawn .



    What redvip2000 said.

    Let’s be honest, God didn’t give the “name” Jehovah or Jesus to anyone. Those are names that humans decided upon.

    Yeshua and YHWH are the most correct that you can ever be until God actually shows up and tells you differently. Translators who refused to write anything except YHWH are the most honest of the bunch.

    There is no conspiracy to hide Gods “name” and JWism’s claim to having restored God’s name is a complete farce.


  • steve2

    rattigan350 - in your view, you go even further than JW organization who acknowledge the name "Jehovah" was the best guess made by a monk in the 13th Century with the manuscripts he had available at that time but it is wrong.

    Scholarship backed by extensive research (which JW organization accepts as valid) concludes that the most accurate English form of the sacred name is "Yahweh".

    Fair enough if we were talking about Joe Bloggs name - but we aren't: We talking about the claimed sacred name of the Most High and One True God (according to JW organization).

    That being the case, His so-called "named" people should adhere to the most accurate transliteration. Besides, they are always going on about the light getting brighter - so here's an excellent instance of their being able to say that truth is so very important to them, they will promote and make known the name "Yahweh" but they have rigidly refused, sticking to Russell's and then Rutherford's borrowing the 13th Century inaccurate name (from Christendom no less!) and claiming it as the name of their God.

  • NewYork44M

    Posting on Facebook is a great way to count time and return visits.

  • Lost in the fog
    Lost in the fog

    The WT organisation has recently said that nothing from their literature or from the jw(dot) org website is to be shared online especially not on social media sites. They claim that it infringes the copyright of their material.

    So it probably means that whoever is posting this online wants to preach to the world, but at the same time is being disobedient to the GB.

    ws18 August p. 30 "Questions From Readers, Why is no-one allowed to post publications of Jehovah’s Witnesses on other websites or on social media?"

    And ends with:

    You can find a link to the Terms of Use at the bottom of the home page on jw.org. These rules apply to everything that is available on our websites.

  • jhine

    l found the reply eventually .

    l had put " ------ it was never in the New Testament "

    she replied " Jesus used his Father's name : and encouraged his followers to do likewise . Also the writers of the NT definitely used God's name when it was used in verses they quoted from "

    My reply

    " l will say again that there is no evidence that the Tetragrammaton was ever in any of the NT documents . Anyway the word Jehovah was made up by a 16th century Catholic monk , so why the WT uses it is a mystery . The closest way of pronouncing the Divine Name is Yaweh . "

    She said that the WT uses Jehovah because it is the easiest way of saying YHWH . l suggested that if anyone else was interested in this ( which l seriously doubt , the average fb user couldn't care less ) then they should look into it for themselves , her reply was to post a link to a WT site . l said why just believe the WT , we should go to other sources as well . l got " Ok Google it then "

    My hope is that she or her WT sisters and brothers might look into this so to be better prepared to answer questions , but then again l also hope that a jolly fat man in a red suit will come down my none existent chimney and leave me presents . !!!

    So the poster did read my comments and l think that some of her friends did too . If just one person gets some doubts then that would be wonderful .


  • menrov

    Thanks, will try to "influence" the group :-)

  • AnonVet

    No, it does not look like official WT-quality material. This was quite obviously done by someone outside of WT direction.
    It's quite amateurish quality if you ask me.

Share this