bjc2012

Joined

• started 11 topics
• posted 264 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by bjc2012

• 
  35

  Is it Gospel?

  by ISP in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the may 15 2000 watchtower page 4 indicated that scholars at the jesus seminar had concluded that 82% of all the words attributed to jesus in the gospels were not authentic but 'derived from later tradition'.. it is difficult to say for yourself but i do find it remarkable that pauls letters do not contain any references to jesus' life, history or more importantly his teachings.

  the sermon the mount, lords prayer or the golden rule etc.

  do not get a mention in his words to fledgling congregations.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  ISP,

  Paul’s writings were directed mostly to Gentiles who had never been exposed to the Law Covenant, not having been commanded to keep it. It would not have been of much value to these people to dwell on the Sermon on the Mount as Jesus was here explaining the essence of the Law Covenant. The information found in chapters 5 and 6 of Matthew was for the benefit of the Israelite listener as they were under this covenant and had not kept it because they probably did not truly understand it. Jesus was showing them what Jehovah expected of them. Jesus said of the Jewish leaders; “Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you give the tenth of the mint and the dill and the cumin, but you have disregarded the weightier matters of the Law, namely, justice and mercy and faithfulness. These things it was binding to do, yet not to disregard the other things.” (Matthew 23:23) Jesus then had to do what these men failed to do. So, yes, it was gospel! It was gospel to Israel provided they heeded his words.

  Matthew 13:34, 35 states: “All these things Jesus spoke to the crowds by illustrations. Indeed, without an illustration he would not speak to them; that there might be fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet who said: “I will open my mouth with illustrations, I will publish things hidden since the founding.”” If Paul did not write any explanation of these parables, it would be because this information was not applicable to first century Christians. These things would not be fulfilled upon these Christians. Even Paul recognized that there were things that he did not understand. Note his words at 1 Corinthians 13:9. “For we have partial knowledge and we prophesy partially; but when that which is complete arrives, that which is partial will be done away with.” Complete fulfillment of prophesy would not occur in the first century. It was reserved for a later period of time.
• 
  31

  Hi! I'm new.

  by RipVanWinkle in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i chose the screen name of ripvanwinkle because this fictious characher went to sleep and awoke in a different world.

  different setting and must have suffered emotional shock.

  coping skills needed to be learned.. i sometimes feel a little like him.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  Ripvanwinkle,

  You said:

  "Read your message and I can feel your anguish. I guess I keep thinking about what happened during the days of Israel. When there was a good king in power the people prospered. But when those came to power who did not rely upon Jehovah the whole nation suffered. Yet Jehovah had a purpose (His Son Jesus would come from this nation) so he put up with them until is purpose was fulfilled then he divorced himself from them."

  I thought this was a very insightful comment. MDS posted a message similar to yours but with another application. It is on the Bible Research Forum under the title "Observe the Divine Pattern to Understand the Bible." It was posted on April 5th. If you have the opportunity, please read it and I'd like to know your comments regarding it.

  bjc
• 
  5

  Does God Play Fair?

  by messenger in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  does god play fair?.

  once upon a time a mother bought her son a checker game.

  little johnny was so proud to have something so shiny and new.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  Messenger,

  You said:

  "As it is explained God made a deal with Satan to see if he could play the game of rulership better than He. The only addendum was God got to make the rules, no matter what happened God wins and destroys anyone who disagrees. What kind of issue is that? If Satan was an intelligent being why would he agree to a no win situation? If God has to destroy 99% of the world at the end of time to win back his Soverenty, who would the winner appear to be?"

  Who has explained that God made a deal with Satan? I've never read that in the bible. Since when has rulership been a game that God plays with his creation? How does the creation challenge the creator? (Romans 9:20) Jehovah has always been in control and always will be. (Daniel 4:17) Of course, he sets the rules, he is God. If he doesn't set them, who should? It certainly would have to be someone who is able to enforce them. Is it your contention that God is wicked in the way that he deals with mankind? If so, then we are all up the creek without a paddle as we are all living by his permission.

  Where does the Bible say that 99% of the human race is going to be destroyed in order for Jehovah to prove his universal sovereignty? It's not His sovereignty that's in question, but whether the human race will prove itself worthy of living on this earth for eternity. And yes, Jehovah does have the right to make this decision. And I don't believe that Jehovah's Witnesses have made this issue so clear to mankind such that Jehovah would make His decision based on what they have done. I believe that work is yet ahead. Billions of people will yet have the opportunity to make the choice of whether they will live or die. Yes, the provisions of the Abrahamic Covenant will yet enable these ones to make this decision. Isaiah 2:2-4 will be fulfilled with billions of people responding. The 'mountain of the house of Jehovah' has not yet been 'established above the top of the mountains' and 'lifted above the hills' such that 'all the nations' can 'stream to it.' This is a future event!
• 
  16

  The Remnant Watchtower

  by ozziepost in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this week's watchtower study article (feb 15 p23) should be re-named "the remnant manifesto"!.

  a subliminal message centered on the use of the word "remnant" runs right through the article.. para 5: "a faithful remnant in ancient judah were to benefit.".

  para 6: "so jehovah prospered the faithful remnant...".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  Frenchy,

  The terminology is what I'm talking about. In order to be considered a 'remnant' of something, you would by necessity have to have already been a part of this whole group and be the last ones left alive. You would then be the last ones of that group. Now, according to their teaching, they were anointed in the 20th century, so that would make them the last of the gentiles to become anointed. They did not become a part of the whole group until their anointing. This does not make them a remnant of this group. No, but they would be the last ones to become a part of the whole group albeit, most of them were already dead. If you consider all of the scriptures that use the term 'remnant,' you will see that they are speaking about a relatively few who initially were apart of the whole group or nation of Israel, being saved. Specifically, the whole nation of Israel went into Babylon, but only a 'remnant' returned to their homeland. The rest or the majority remained in Babylon.

  So, Jehovah was not 'gathering a remnant of anointed ones' in this 20th century as they claim. They had not even been anointed. He would have been completing a specified number if we are to believe what they say, that is, completing the 144,000.
• 
  19

  Mother-In-Law 2

  by silentlambs in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  well here it is folks the response to my wife's letter.

  i guess i have become more evil between letters.

  once again any ideas as to how to answer this type of logic?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  Silentlambs,

  I would say that you will have a difficult time answering that type of 'logic' because JWs have not reached the position stated in Malachi 3:18. They cannot distinguish "between a righteous one and a wicked one, between one serving God and one who has not served him." They are guilty of what Malachi says at verse 15: " And at present we are pronouncing presumptuous people happy. Also, the doers of wickedness have been built up. Also, they have tested God out and keep getting away." I believe this is exactly what your mother-in-law is doing in her letter.

  Obviously, this type of activity is going on in the congregations as Isaiah 32:5 shows it will cease. It reads: "The senseless one will no longer be called generous; and as for the unprincipled man, he will not be said to be noble." Verse 7 reads: "As for the unprincipled man, his instruments are bad; he himself has given counsel for acts of loose conduct, to wreck the afflicted ones with false sayings, even when someone poor speaks what is right." You may be fighting a loosing battle with her.

  bjc
• 
  16

  The Remnant Watchtower

  by ozziepost in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this week's watchtower study article (feb 15 p23) should be re-named "the remnant manifesto"!.

  a subliminal message centered on the use of the word "remnant" runs right through the article.. para 5: "a faithful remnant in ancient judah were to benefit.".

  para 6: "so jehovah prospered the faithful remnant...".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  Larc,

  I'm simply trying to get you to see why they cannot be the 'remnant' of Israel spoken of in the Bible as the one being saved by Jehovah. They are not a remnant of anything. There is a nearly 2,000-year span between the first century christians and the GB today. They couldn't possibly be a remnant of these christians.
• 
  6

  The 'beasts'

  by kes152 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  j

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  Kes152,

  Those verses in Revelation 13 have had no fulfillment yet.

  bjc
• 
  15

  Door To Door? Not At Heathrow!

  by Englishman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  all this talk about whether door to door work is fruitful or not has really got me thinking.. so i was wondering, (a) how many jw's or ex's here were actually converted on the door, and (b) how many jw's or ex's here ever obtained a convert on the door?.

  i made 2 converts whilst a jw, but 1 was the son of an interested person, the other was a wayward son of a weak sister so i get a zero.. my dad worked at london heathrow as an air traffic controller, he got 6 other controllers to join up, so if you're arriving in the uk, don't fly apostasy airways!

  for all his frequent bouts of vac pioneering, i don't think that he ever pulled a live one off the doors, so he gets a zero too.. my mum was quite a puller in her time but they were all friends of friends who came to sit in on bible studies etc, so, sorry mater, you get a zero also.. as a matter of fact, i'm wondering if the door to door work isn't completely pointless!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  Hi Englishman,

  My parents became JWs as a result of the door-to-door work. This was in 1948. In the southern USA at that time, this was the only way to gain converts. Almost no one had relatives who were witnesses as there were so few of them. I did aid two people to become JWs that I met in the door-to-door work. Of course, I have conducted many, many studies with individuals. I eventually realized that for every 10 or so Bible studies you conduct, you might get one convert. It was a very time consuming way to attract people as it would sometimes take two years of study with them before they made a decision to get baptized.
• 
  16

  The Remnant Watchtower

  by ozziepost in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this week's watchtower study article (feb 15 p23) should be re-named "the remnant manifesto"!.

  a subliminal message centered on the use of the word "remnant" runs right through the article.. para 5: "a faithful remnant in ancient judah were to benefit.".

  para 6: "so jehovah prospered the faithful remnant...".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  Larc,

  When have the 144,000 been together as a whole group? They can't be a remnant of something that has never existed as a whole.
• 
  16

  The Remnant Watchtower

  by ozziepost in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this week's watchtower study article (feb 15 p23) should be re-named "the remnant manifesto"!.

  a subliminal message centered on the use of the word "remnant" runs right through the article.. para 5: "a faithful remnant in ancient judah were to benefit.".

  para 6: "so jehovah prospered the faithful remnant...".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bjc2012

  Ozziepost,

  I'm still trying to figure out how these men can classify themselves as a 'remnant.' What were they originally a part of such that they could be said to be the remaining part of it? If they are the remnant who were released from Babylonish captivity, where is the larger part of the group who were left in captivity? Or, should I say who is the larger group that was left in captivity?