Visit From Jehovah's Witnesses
Landy, why did you just bother to make that comment? It's obvious that some JWs do wake up.
It do seem like a waste of time trying to witness to a Jehovah's Witness. I'm astonished that Stephan was not the least bit interested in literature from 1995 and the flippant way he said, "We don't believe that anymore." How can a religion say they have the truth then say, "We don't believe that anymore?" I wonder if he realizes that the implication is that his religion was teaching something false by his statements? I wonder if he can think it through and ask, "How do I know if they are not teaching something false now?"
Then his statement about other churches and how the witnesses are not the only true religion? He really seems like more of a social witness than someone who cares about their dogma.
I have to admit that I feel similarly to some of the individuals who responded to the atheists who immediately went on the attack to Vanderhoven7's original post. While I can see their reasoning, I can also see it as being a bit discouraging. When I came on this board 7 years ago, I was very much a true Bible believing Christian who had just learned about the false teachings of the JWs. I remember receiving a lot of support from this group, even from the individuals who were atheists.
This group was very much more a diverse group of theists and non-theists than what I see today. I think if I had found this board the way it is now back when I first joined, I doubt I would've stayed long enough to eventually begin to question my own belief system.
I'm surprised those JWs agreed to any further meetings because it was clear at the outset that you knew far more than you were supposed to from the WT perspective.
"Then his statement about other churches and how the witnesses are not the only true religion? He really seems like more of a social witness than someone who cares about their dogma."
No. Stephen is clearly a flat-out, shameless liar!
Interesting meeting...I wonder what scritures Mormons do use to back up their belief in Joseph Smith as prophet?
The witnesses gave some typically evasive answers which in essence are un-truths. As to a normative relationship with Jesus - they say they "talk to him everyday". We all know that refers to a brief "in Jesus name" at the end of prayers.
In denying the GB was appointed the F&DS in 1919 they might just get away with being unconvinced of the exact date, but a Witness will be immediately disfellowshipped for denying the GB are the F&DS.
And other religons won't be destroyed at Armageddon? Someone ought to let mr Antony Morris III know, his convention talk will need re-writing!!!
Toward the close of meeting two I steered the conversation back to disfellowshipping and shunning.
That's when I told him about a sweet and gentle Christian and friend (Carl Sherb) who was a ministerial servant before he was disfellowshipped for apostasy. His daughter and son shunned him for ten years right up until days before his death from cancer.
Stephen asked me if I knew what an apostate was. That's when he started ranting about how they open their mouths to talk against the organization. I said Carl did not speak against the organization. He challenged me on that and I told him he was wrong about the org not disfellowshipping for holding views contrary to the official doctrine. I pulled out my copy of the Watchtower Apr 1, 1986 p.30-31 Questions From Readers and read the underlined material.
Why have Jehovah's Witnesses disfellowshipped (excommunicated) for apostasy some who still profess belief in God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ?...
Obviously, a basis for approved fellowship with Jehovah's Witnesses cannot rest merely on a belief in God, in the Bible, in Jesus Christ, and so forth. ...Approved association with Jehovah's Witnesses requires accepting the entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those Scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah's Witnesses. What do such beliefs include?
That the great issue before humankind is the rightfulness of Jehovah's sovereignty, which is why he has allowed wickedness so long. (Ezekiel 25:17) That Jesus Christ had a prehuman existence and is subordinate to his heavenly Father. (John 14:28) That there is a "faithful and discreet slave" upon earth today 'entrusted with all of Jesus' earthly interests,' which slave is associated with the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. (Matthew 24:45-47) That 1914 marked the end of the Gentile Times and the establishment of the Kingdom of God in the heavens, as well as the time for Christ's foretold presence. (Luke 21:7-24; Revelation 11:15-12:10) That only 144,000 Christians will receive the heavenly reward. (Revelation 14:1, 3) That Armageddon, referring to the battle of the great day of God the Almighty, is near. (Revelation 16:14, 16; 19:11-21) That it will be followed by Christ's Millennial Reign, which will restore an earth-wide paradise. That the first to enjoy it will be the present "great crowd" of Jesus' "other sheep."-John 10:16; Revelation 7:9-17; 21:3, 4.
Do we have Scriptural precedent for taking such a strict position? Indeed we do! Paul wrote about some in his day: "Their word will spread like gangrene. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of that number. These very men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred; and they are subverting the faith of some." (2 Timothy 2:17, 18; see also Matthew 18:6.) There is nothing to indicate that these men did not believe in God, in the Bible, in Jesus' sacrifice. Yet, on this one basic point, what they were teaching as to the time of the resurrection, Paul rightly branded them as apostates, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship.
Similarly, the apostle John termed as antichrists those who did not believe that Jesus had come in the flesh. They may well have believed in God, in the Hebrew Scriptures, in Jesus as God's Son, and so on. But on this point, that Jesus had actually come in the flesh, they disagreed and thus were termed "antichrist." John goes on to say regarding those holding such variant views: "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works."2 John 7, 10, 11.
Following such Scriptural patterns, if a Christian (who claims belief in God, the Bible, and Jesus) unrepentantly promotes false teachings, it may be necessary for him to be expelled from the congregation. (See Titus 3:10, 11.)
I kept reading from the September 1, 1980 SCG:SSF letter to circuit and district overseers which reads:
"Keep in mind that to be disfellowshipped, an apostate does not have to be a promotor of apostate views. [...]
Therefore, if a baptized Christian abandons the teachings of Jehovah, as presented by the faithful and discreet slave, and persists in believing other doctrine despite Scriptural reproof, then he is apostatizing. [...]
However, if, after such extended efforts have been put forth to readjust his thinking, he continues to believe the apostate ideas and rejects what he has been provided through the 'slave class', then appropriate judicial action should be taken"
We ended on that note and surprisingly they agreed to meet next week. I suggested S&R present their scriptural evidence for the existence of Christians since 1935 who are not born again and are bereft of a heavenly hope. They were happy with that. They then asked if I was a disfellowshiped JW and I told them I'd only been inside a KH about 3 times.
BTW Stephen has been a JW for 25 years; Ruth I'm not sure. Stephen boasted that he has influenced 5 people to become JWs. They all probably fell for his rose-colored presentation of the JW experience.
Until next week then.
Thanks for your interest.
Let me try to politely explain my opening antipathy. Discussions like these legitimise the beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses to a great extent.
Well consider the following statements and try to determine whether they are being spoken by a JW or another Christian debating with them;
- "We share a love and respect for the Bible despite our difference in beliefs"
- "My beliefs are Bible based"
- "It's important to worship god in the right way, I'm trying to do that"
Impossible isn't it? But what these discussions do is entrench the false notion that respect for god and the bible are important when clearly they aren't.
How much shunning would there be without this irrationality? How many needless deaths? How many teenagers and adults repressing their true sexual identity? How much wifely submission? How many career dreams broken. How many families divided?
Someone earlier commented about uniting against the common Watchtower enemy. Wrong battle. We should be fighting to free the people we love from the faith based mentality which is at the root of all these problems. Shoring up respect for the Bible only gets in the way of that.
Vanderhoven I bear you no ill will but I hope no one has a discussion with my Mum like you are having with these two JWs, it would only reinforce the trap she's in.
Landy, why did you just bother to make that comment? It's obvious that some JWs do wake up.
You're correct, they do. But it doesn't happen by someone being a biblical smartarse at a door they happen to be knocking on. As Nic says, it tends to reinforce their beliefs.
When people leave the witnesses they tend to do it through self realisation, or more commonly, through apathy. It's only once they've stepped away from it they can see it for what it is.
A website like this will do a lot more to help people see the religion for what it is than standing at the door preaching at them. In this particular case the op just seems to be other side of the JW coin.
The other factor is that people who engage in this sort of confrontation often do it to service their own ego rather than it beng a genuine effort to help someone else.