- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Revelation 13:8 (English Standard Version)
8and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was slain.
…written BEFORE the foundation…in the book of life OF THE LAMB
The book is the Lamb. The Lamb is the sacrifice. This sacrifice was also BEFORE.
Hi casey,
The Lamb existed as the Word, partook of flesh, was chosen from the flock as the perfect sacrifice before he was killed at Jerusalem.Quote Hi David! If what you are saying is true then how do you know that you are saved?
Worshipping Jesus, “He who has endured to the end is the one that will be saved.” (Mattew 24 something)
Once a person is saved, is he always saved?
Jude 5, RS: “I desire to remind you, though you were once for all fully informed, that he who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.” (Italics added.)
Matt. 24:13, RS: “He who endures to the end will be saved.” (So a person’s final salvation is not determined at the moment that he begins to put faith in Jesus.)
Phil. 2:12, RS: “As you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” (This was addressed to “the saints,” or holy ones, at Philippi, as stated in Philippians 1:1. Paul urged them not to be overly confident but to realize that their final salvation was not yet assured.)
Heb. 10:26, 27, RS: “If we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries.” (Thus the Bible does not go along with the idea that no matter what sins a person may commit after he is “saved” he will not lose his salvation. It encourages faithfulness. See also Hebrews 6:4-6, where it is shown that even a person anointed with holy spirit can lose his hope of salvation.)
Quote You say “A lot of people “**KNOW**” they are saved, but are clearly not.” If this is true than no one can be assured of their salvation!
I'm not saying that.So david,
Do you have any assurance of your personal salvation or are you relying on the JW theory that all are forgiven at death, a variation of the universalism heresy?Hi David:
When I use the term “Israel of God”, I am referring to the whole body of Christ, and not to just the 144,000.
Also, you ask: “Is it possible for a person to have God's spirit and yet not be 'born again'”? Then you conclude that it is because John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Ghost right from his mother's womb, and the Holy Ghost spoke through David, and I might say that the Holy Ghost spoke through other prophets as well. Hebrews 1:1 states: “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds:”.
The prophets were servants of God and were righteous before God under the covenant relationship that God had with the nation of Israel under the Law, but the sacrifice, that is the shed blood of our Lord Jesus, that would wash away their sins had not yet been offered. Jesus sacrifice was the proptiation for the sins of all who by faith have striven to obey God from the beginning. Their body has died, but they are alive to God because their sins have been forgiven through the shed blood of our Lord Jesus.
However, since the resurrection of our Lord Jesus, the only way to receive the Holy Ghost is through the born again experience which I explained in my previous post. We who have come to God with a repentant heart through our Lord Jesus are all sons of God and not just the 144,000. As I said those in authority who have been ordained by God, were babies in Christ just as all of us who are born again were at one time. We are all at different stages of maturity.
About the 144,000 I was saying that God was using them to bring the body of Christ to maturity so that he can come for the body of Christ in what is commonly called the rapture. “For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord”. (1 Thes. 4:14-17) “Behold, I shew you a mystery, we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord”. (1 Co. 15:51-58) Also, please read Matthew 24:5-31)
I will share my understanding of the 1000 year reign later.
I hope this helps.
Quote Yes but I am not speaking of merely one booklet. I have read many of your Awake and Watchtower magazines. Where I lived a few years ago the witnesses would leave them in the laundry room. A few magazines now and again would speak of Jesus. Maybe that's your perception. But if you take any year and look at all the publications in printed in that year, I guarantee you that you will be proven wrong.
I tell you what. Tell me exactly which publications you are speaking of. I'll do the counting myself. Done. You make it seem like it's an 8:1 ratio (Jehovah:Jesus) like the Bible. I assure you it's closer to 2:1 than that. But even if it was something exactly like the Bible, 8:1, how would you argue that that is wrong?Quote I have four of the small little booklets at home and only a few of the Watchtowers since they aren’t left anywhere I live. Remind me of the math. I don’t remember any numbers except for the number of literature printed. Maybe you did but I don’t recall. It's in this thread, I'd say about 1/4 way through our discussion. I don't know the page. Maybe do a search of the word “ratio” as I don't think that word is used a lot in this forum. It should work. You know, it's quite possible the four booklets you have are booklets on very specific subjects, and some of them may be dealing specifically with God. If you look at our little tracts, we have one on Jehovah. We have one on Jesus. It's true that as far as our “booklets” and “broshures” nothing specifically about Jesus only comes to mind, whereas there is one and only one that deals specifically with Jehovah. But go back and check the math.
Quote Then why read the Scriptures at all if they do not pertain to ALL of us believers? What purpose would the WHOLE of Scripture mean to us who are not the “anointed”? ROMANS 8:19
“For the eager expectation of the creation is waiting for the revealing of the sons of God.”ARe you not eager to see these things fullfilled? aRe you not eager to see God's kingdom and those who rule it bring peace to mankind in righteous rule?
I am.
God chose to do things His way. It bothers me when people (such as Nick as an example) say that it isn't fair. Why did God choose him and not me? Why did God only choose so many? Because that's all that's needed to make this a fair loving rulership by our peers who have experienced the trials and tribulations of living on earth. Not everyone on the planet needs to make up a jury. Only 12.Quote Then why read the Scriptures at all if they do not pertain to ALL of us believers?
Let's look at your question this way. One letter is sent to the congregation of Ephesus. One to Colassae. ONe to Philipi. Etc. Those letters weren't specifically written to us. But they are beneficial for certain to all. They tell us about God, what he wants from us, from his followers. They are encouraging.Quote That is a looooong period to stretch. How many of JW’s since your organization was founded in the late 1800’s early 1900’s considered themselves the elect? That is not to come off as condescending but serious. Do you know how many or is their a record?
I'm not saying that God selected the same number of people from each century. You'd have to know about God to be selected. It wasn't until this last century that the great preaching work fortold has been taking place. There were a lot of dark ages in the past.
In answer to your second question, yes I believe there are records. There are presently only about 8 thousand of the annointed alive. They are all very old (mostly in their 80's and 90's.)Casey, I want to and will answer and read the rest of your post, but must attend to other things right now.
david
Hi david,
You say
” It bothers me when people (such as Nick as an example) say that it isn't fair”
Quote please.
ps you have forgotten to tell me how one is shown to be a member of the 144,000. Is it a vote or a spiritual revelation??Ok, I'm back. I'd like to skip ahead in your post and discuss the birthday celebration.
I began by looking for answers to my questions which I asked of you:
Quote
“Questions:
1. Why do you think the early Christians refused to celebrate birthdays (including Jesus birthday)? There is no record of Christians celebrating Jesus birth for hundreds of years. Why did they refuse to do so? (I can provide a string of quotes saying they didn't, if you like, showing that the early Christians regarded them as a practive for the pagans) They didn't just neglect to do so. They purposefully avoided celebrating them. My question to you: WHY? Why do you think? And DO YOU THINK THEIR REASONS ARE UNIMPORTANT?2. “ALL scripture is …. beneficial for teaching, for setting things straight.” (2 tim 3:16,17)
My second question to you: Why do the only two accounts of birthdays in the Bible (Pharoah and Herod) both involve bloodshed of God's servants? If all scripture including those scriptures are beneficial for teaching, what do we learn from them? Why does the Bible present birthdays in such a negative light? It is not just a coincidence that the only birthdays mentioned involved bloodshed. Looking at history, we see the same. So my question to you is: If the Bible presents birthdays this way, why disregard it? Are those accounts not part of the “all scripture” that is beneficial for setting things straight? You say you prefer to stick to what scripture has to say about it. Do you?3. Yes, lots of things are pagan. Lots of things have idolatrous roots. Birthdays are one of them. The birthday observance was common in many polytheistic cultures. Idolatrous rites were performed in honoro fhte patron god of each particular birthday, and birthdays of mythical gods like Saturn and Apollo were celebrated.
If you think the quotes are wrong and the customs or origins are wrong, I ask you why the birthday cake? Why the candles? Find a source that explains it in another way.
Over and over again in the references that I am looking at, I see that the early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays because of associating it with idolatry. Over and over again I see this. The Bible clearly condemns idolatry. (1 cor 6:9,10; Eph 5:5)
My question to you is: Has this faded in God's memory? What does God think of such things? God saw first hand where this celebration came from the the trail of blood that followed it. Is it just “innocent fun” to Jehovah? What do you think?Birthday celebrations are rooted in idolatry and they have left a trail of blood. Faithful first century Chritians would not have felt like joining in a custom so darkly presented in the Bible and so gruesomely celebrated by the Romans. Today, sincere Christians realize that the Bible accounts about birthdays were among the things written for our instruction. (Rom 15:4)
Jesus and the apostles fortold and apostasy. Many things changed. I find the following quote very revealing:
“To the early Christians, birthdays were a pagan custom. It was unthinkable to celebrate one’s own birthday, much less the birthday of Christ. . . .In the next 300 years this attitude began to change, and in 354 A.D., the Bishop of Rome declared December 25 to be the anniversary of the birth of Christ.”–Frontier, Dec, 1981
“I didn't find any answers to any of these questions Casey. (And Seeking truth, I'd still also like your thoughts on what I wrote.)
Quote To begin with you are beginning with a platform from which to build your structure. What you do not do though is test your hypothesis. For a hypothesis to become a fact or truth according to science it must be proven.
My hypothesis is that the birthday celebration perhaps isn't fitting for followers of Christ.
My “proof” is that the early Christians, the ones before the fortold apostasy found them not fitting for themselves, because of their history, background and perhaps because of how the Bible presents them.
It is a fact that the early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays. I dare you to prove otherwise. I double dare you. It's not a matter of picking quotes from the right sources. They didn't celebrate birthdays. They didn't just neglect to do so. They refused to do so, and this was based on their Bible trained consciences. My question to you: WERE THEY WRONG IN THEIR THINKING? Were the earliest Christians wrong?You state that I started out with a platform or belief and tried to prove it. You are wrong. Really, the exact opposite is true. You are the one who has no choice but to defend this tradition of yours. What would it mean to you and your family and friends if you rejected birthdays? It is your tradition and you must start from your platform of tradition. Otherwise, people will look at you oddly and you will miss out on so much fun.
I on the other hand used to celebrate birthdays. If you remember my testimony, it is of me walking to my grandma's to tell her that I have decided not to celebrate birthdays. I did this just a week before my birthday. I didn't make this choice easily. I did a mountain of research. I checked every encyclopedia I could find.
I made the hard choice and you are making the easy choice, therefore if any of us is beginning from a platform of belief and trying to defend it unrightly, it would seem to be you, dear Casey. Think of all that would happen to you if you stopped celebrating birthdays. Are you willing to consider it? Is the notion of not celebrating birthdays something you even considered? Probably not. So who is it that is closed minded? I'm sorry, but this is how I see it.Quote In order to be proven it must pass rigerous tests and not contradict previous finding.
My beliefs do not contract the earliest Christians beliefs. Yours do. It's not what I think. It's a fact. Research it.Quote If you study the case for birthdays being ok to celebrate (I did not say “had” to; it is an option to do or not to do) you may come to a different conclusion or you may vilify your hypothesis.
Most people don't want to study this, because they may be afraid of what they will find. Am I right, Casey? Question: Are you even willing to give up birthdays at all? And if not, wouldn't your thinking be biased, based on your love of this tradition?Quote If I take a position and lay that position down as my foundation, it would be easy for me to build upon. I can study Church History and quote early Church Fathers. I can find millions of websites that support my theory.
I know you think that you could do so, and I know this belief of yours helps calm you. Which are these websites? And what is your theory? If your theory is that birthdays are don't have an idolatrous background, of course you'd be wrong. If your theory was that the early Christians didn't reject birthdays, you'd be wr
ong. But if your theory, like most is: “Its all innocent fun, and let's not think about things too much,” then that is a theory people are willing to accept. But it's not based on the Bible or history.Quote If I wanted to build a building in support of my PRESUMED idea, theory, hypothesis to make it a fact it would be very easy to.
You seem to have avoided all my questions very nicely. You are trying to sidestep what I said by implying that it is wrong without actually saying anything about birthdays from the Bible or from history.Quote The problem is I have already biasly taken an idea and assumed it is correct.
Yes, I realize this. Most of us spend a lot of time trying to avoid pain. If you did something as bizarre as rejecting the birthday celelbration like the early Christians did, it would cause you certain kinds of pain. It is easier for you to be biased than to take a risk at being different. I understand.Quote The presumption is never tested, and the elements in which I built my structure were not inspected and standing against all odds, the storms of the opposing side will topple my self made structure for it was never questioned to begin with.
Are you talking about me or you here? Because I have questioned all things. Many of the answers I found were hard ones.Quote Scripture does not forbid the celebration of birthdays.
hmmm. So I wonder why the early Christians refused to celebrate them? Maybe it is because scripture does forbid idolatry. Maybe it is because of the origins of birthdays and the history. You're right though, we as Christians are only commanded to commemorate the Lord's death. It's the only thing we are commanded to memorialize. We aren't even commanded to celebrate Christ's birth anywhere and no date of his birth is mentioned.ECCLESIASTES 7:1,8
“A name is better than good oil, and the day of death than the day of one’s being born. . . .Better is the end afterward of a matter than its beginning.”We are born a question mark. We die and exclamation mark.
It bothers me that you refused to answer any of my questions. What am I to think?
Quote To use a few passages where people were murdered or martyred on these special occassions is not very wise.
Maybe you should read my post again. If it were just one, it might be able to be dismissed. Both accounts are strikingly similar. Birthdays for enemies of God. Death of someone righteous. And looking at history, we see that cruel rulers have an odd history of putting to death people on their birthdays. So it wans't just a coincidence that these things happened in these two biblical accounts. History shows otherwise.
The ancient Jewish historian Josephus reveals that these incidents were not unique. He records other instances of the practice of birthday executions for entertainment.
For example, some occurred after Jerusalem’s destruction in 70 C.E., when 1,000,000 Jews perished and 97,000 survived to be taken prisoner. En route to Rome, Roman general Titus took his Jewish captives to the nearby seaport of Caesarea.
Josephus writes: “While Titus remained at Caesarea, he celebrated his brother Domitian’s birthday with great splendor, putting over 2,500 prisoners to death in games with beasts and flames. After this he moved to Berytus [Beirut], a Roman colony in Phoenicia, where he celebrated his father’s birthday by killing many more captives at elaborate exhibitions.”—The Jewish War, VII, 37, translated by Paul L. Maier in Josephus: The Essential Writings.Quote It would be like saying that Jesus showed it ok to get drunk at wedding feasts, feasts that lasted 7 days according to Jewish tradition. You cannot base your actions on Scriptures that merely show what people did.
What would you say to the early Christians who refused to celebrate birthdays? The same thing?
The Bible of course specifically condemns drunkeness, but nowhere does it specifically say birthdays are acceptable.
I understand what you're saying. But being that other scriptures condemen idolatry and being that the early Christians rejected this custom, I think it's fair to say that the “coincidence” of the terrible similarities experienced on those birthdays are not a coincidence and match other histories.Quote So it is ok to have thousands of wives like Solomon?
The Bible actually says that his wives turned him to false gods. His wives were his downfall.Quote Since Scripture is silent on such things as celebrating Jesus's birthday and celebrating birthdays and tested with Scripture they are not withstood, condemned and at the same time condoned or commended.
They are not specifically condemned. But something about them had to be, for the early Christians refused to celebrate them–maybe it was their idolatrous roots, which is condemned.Quote If you read carefully what Paul had to say in regards to placing one day above another in Colossians your organization would not have this problem. For Paul says that some regard all days alike and some emphasize some days over otherdays. However Paul states that all is done unto the Lord. Paul would have no qualms with either of these disputes you present.
Well apparently Paul and the early Christians did have qualms, as history testifies that the early Christians refused to partake in birthday celebrations.“To the early Christians, birthdays were a pagan custom. It was unthinkable to celebrate one’s own birthday, much less the birthday of Christ. . . .In the next 300 years this attitude began to change, and in 354 A.D., the Bishop of Rome declared December 25 to be the anniversary of the birth of Christ.”–Frontier, Dec, 1981
You say: “if you read carefully…” Well if you read carefully, I think you'll see that you are misaplying it. Isn't it referring to whether or not to celebrate Jewish festival? Regardless, it wasn't saying that it's ok to celebrate anything regardless of it's nature or customs.Before I forget I should include these scriptures:
Eccl. 3:12, 13: “There is nothing better for them than to rejoice and to do good during one’s life; and also th
at every man should eat and indeed drink and see good for all his hard work. It is the gift of God.”
See also 1 Corinthians 10:31.
Wholesome gatherings of family and friends at other times to eat, drink, and rejoice are not objectionable. A lot of people get the idea that Jehovah's Witnesses never have fun or rejoice or have parties or anything like that. This is wrong. But, that said, we are to, as Paul said:
“keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord.”—Ephesians 5:10.
We must make sure that we avoid religious holidays and other customs that violate God’s principles. (1 Thessalonians 5:21)Quote To me it is a mere distraction of what is more importance like being born again, the elect including millions more than 144,000 and other more important discussions.
Of course this is a side issue and a very little one.Quote You may present the day as a day for the pagan Sun god. I myself have a problem with rabbits and eggs
So you have a problem with some idolatrous customs but not others? What of the cake? The candles? The birthday wishes?Quote in fact if you look you will not find that the first believers did celebrate this day so what can you reply to that?
What do I reply to that? ? ? You're referring to the memorial of the Lord's death, a day commanded by him to celebrate. Of course they celebratred it. But they weren't doing so with idolatrous fertility symbols or gods. So I fail to see your point.Quote You may show these many American customs as wrong in any fashion you can find but that does not make it wrong nor does it make your foundation right. ALL IS DONE UNTO THE LORD according to the conscience of the believer.
The thing is, some of our consciences have been seared.
1 TIMOTHY 4:1-2
“However, the inspired utterance says definitely that in later periods of time some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired utterances and teachings of demons, by the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, marked in their conscience as with a branding iron;”In later periods of time, about 300 years after Christ, it became ok to celebrate holidays that had idolatrous backgrounds. I wonder why?
I would like the exact scripture you're referring to here. Is this the one:
1 CORINTHIANS 10:31
“Therefore, whether YOU are eating or drinking or doing anything else, do all things for God’s glory.”
Clearly it's not talking about just anything. Whether you're eating or drinking or murdering or stealing…..no. (1 thes 5:21)Quote So if you feel celebrating birthday is wrong, to you it is wrong then. But question why this goes against your conscience. Is it because of tradition? Are you condeming a tradition WITH tradition. A tradition that has developed over time in the Watchtower?
It it is a tradition to not celebrate birthdays, it was started by the Jewish Christians, not modern day Jehovah's Witnesses.
In my mind Casey, a tradition is something you do for so long you have no idea why you're doing it. How often to most (including yourself) ask why there is a cake with candles on it? How often? I know why I don't celebrate birthdays. How many who celebrate them have a clue why they do this, other than that it is tradition? To say that it is a tradition to not do something seems odd to me.Summing up on this, you didn't answer one of my question. Here they are again:
1. Why do you think the early Christians refused to celebrate birthdays (including Jesus birthday)? There is no record of Christians celebrating Jesus birth for hundreds of years. Why did they refuse to do so? (I can provide a string of quotes saying they didn't, if you like, showing that the early Christians regarded them as a practive for the pagans) They didn't just neglect to do so. They purposefully avoided celebrating them. My question to you: WHY? Why do you think? And DO YOU THINK THEIR REASONS ARE UNIMPORTANT?
2. “ALL scripture is …. beneficial for teaching, for setting things straight.” (2 tim 3:16,17)
My second question to you: Why do the only two accounts of birthdays in the Bible (Pharoah and Herod) both involve bloodshed of God's servants? If all scripture including those scriptures are beneficial for teaching, what do we learn from them? Why does the Bible present birthdays in such a negative light? It is not just a coincidence that the only birthdays mentioned involved bloodshed. Looking at history, we see the same. So my question to you is: If the Bible presents birthdays this way, why disregard it? Are those accounts not part of the “all scripture” that is beneficial for setting things straight? You say you prefer to stick to what scripture has to say about it. Do you?3. Yes, lots of things are pagan. Lots of things have idolatrous roots. Birthdays are one of them. The birthday observance was common in many polytheistic cultures. Idolatrous rites were performed in honoro fhte patron god of each particular birthday, and birthdays of mythical gods like Saturn and Apollo were celebrated.
If you think the quotes are wrong and the customs or origins are wrong, I ask you why the birthday cake? Why the candles? Find a source that explains it in another way.
Over and over again in the references that I am looking at, I see that the early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays because of associating it with idolatry. Over and over again I see this. The Bible clearly condemns idolatry. (1 cor 6:9,10; Eph 5:5)
My question to you is: Has this faded in God's memory? What does God think of such things? God saw first hand where this celebration came from the the trail of blood that followed it. Is it just “innocent fun” to Jehovah? What do you think?Birthday celebrations are rooted in idolatry and they have left a trail of blood. Faithful first century Chritians would not have felt like joining in a custom so darkly presented in the Bible and so gruesomely celebrated by the Romans. Today, sincere Christians realize that the Bible accounts about birthdays were among the things written for our instruction. (Rom 15:4)
Jesus and the apostles fortold and apostasy. Many things changed. I find the following quote very revealing:
“To the early Christians, birthdays were a pagan custom. It was unthinkable to celebrate one’s own birthday, much less the birthday of Christ. . . .In the next 300 years this attitude began to change, and in 354 A.D., the Bishop of Rome declared December 25 to be the anniversary of the birth of Christ.”–Frontier, Dec, 1981
Hi casey, you stated:
Quote On another note, the presentation of joining the American Armed forces being wrong does not stand up in court. America is the only country aside for some in Britain that defends Israel's cause. God will keep America blessed for that very fact. America has slumped in morality and we are being judged, but we defend Israel's cause and the other nations are against Israel whom Satan hates also and some like N Korea and Iran would have them off the map if we would join them. Time and again the witness literature and you yourself have presented the holocaust and the witnesses [NOT] joining the German Army but again this is just another futile attempt to defend pacifism. No real believing Christian would join Hitler's military campaign then. The true born again believing Protestants did not. The ideology that Hitler spoke was full of hate and evil. True Christians saw straight through the smoke screen. If Bush placed an attack on Israel, true believers would rather die or be placed in quarantine – or the brig. The nations of the world for the most part are not Christian so the thesis that Christians will be killing other Christians is just plan ludicrous. I think the Spirit of God in the born again believers is strong and wise enough to keep the elect from such killing. Quote No real believing Christian would join Hitler's military campaign then.
Right. My point is that no real believing Christians did join Hitler's military campaign. That's my point exactly. Yet, it seems all religions did, except one. You've made my point beautifully.
Let's do a quick check of wickepedia.
“During the war, prisoners in the concentration camps included millions of Jews, along with Communists, hundreds of thousands of Poles, Soviet and other prisoners of war, homosexuals, gypsies, certain Catholics, some Jehovah's Witnesses, and others.”
Some of these groups were put there, obviously because Hitler considered them different, and not because of their religion. I find it odd that “certain Catholics” were there, but I guess it doesn't say why they were there. Hitler also tried to do away with all those who suffered from disabilities.
But JW's were the only group, THE ONLY GROUP that could have left if they signed a piece of paper denouncing their faith.
You're right. No real Christians joined Hitlers military campaign. Good point.As an outside source, I'd like to point out that a lot of countries think that the US is Satan. I'd like to point out that you only see what your government will allow you to see.
Quote Time and again the witness literature and you yourself have presented the holocaust and the witnesses [NOT] joining the German Army but again this is just another futile attempt to defend pacifism.
Believe it or not, we do not believe in pacifism. We look to armageddon, God's war to end wickedness. We look to his kingdom which will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, (not the U.S. for our hope)–Dan 2:44Quote The true born again believing Protestants did not [join hitlers military].
I'm sorry. Which group was that? What badge did they wear when they were thrown in the concentration camps for not joining Hitler's military campaign? Was it a purple triangle? I think it was.Quote True Christians saw straight through the smoke screen.
Yes they did. Thanks for pointing that out again.Quote The nations of the world for the most part are not Christian so the thesis that Christians will be killing other Christians is just plan ludicrous.
There are true Christians in each country. The preaching of the good news of the kingdom is taking place (mat 24:14) and people are becoming Christians. It is ludacris that true Christians would be killing other Christians, but not because certain nations are “Christian” and certain ones aren't. It's ludarcris because true followers of Jesus have “love among themselves” and so they would never kill their fellow believer, their brother.Quote I think the Spirit of God in the born again believers is strong and wise enough to keep the elect from such killing.
In the “war” thread, I've asked nick a few times if he was in a different country from T8, and those two countries went to war if he would partake, if he would possibly kill T8. He could't answer and refuses to. I agree with you strongly that the annointed would never kill their brothers. That's ridiculous. Yet, there are many who say they are of that elect and can't even say: “I would never kill T8,” despite my asking for it.david.
Hi Casey. I checked anther site:
It said:
“An estimated 5.5 million other victims of Nazi atrocities — labelled “enemies of the German state” — included up to half a million Gypsies, an estimated 10,000-15,000 homosexuals and 3 million non-Jewish Poles. Catholic and Protestant clergy also were sent to concentration camps as well as Jehovah's Witnesses.“
http://isurvived.org/AUSCHWITZ_TheCamp.htmlIsn't it interesting that only some of the Catholic and protestant CLERGY went to the concentration camps.
“Homosexuals, political prisoners, and Jehovah's Witnesses are among the groups who were sent to the concentration camps for reeducation. They were supposed to renounce their particular orientation. . . .No credence was placed in a simple change of opinion by homosexuals, such as was granted to Jehovah's Witnesses,”
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/gaycomp.html“Unlike Jews, homosexuals and Gypsies who were persecuted for racial, political and social reasons. Jehovah's Witnesses were persecuted on religious ideological grounds. The Nazi government gave detained Jehovah's Witnesses the option if they were to renounce their faith, submit to the state authority, and support the German military they would be free to leave prison or the camps.”
http://www.answers.com/topic/persecution-of-jehovah-s-witnesses“Before the ban on Jehovah's Witnesses in 1933, church circles had tried, initially, to “fully utilize existing legal grounds for taking action against the Bible Students” as stated by Dr. Detlef Garbe a leading authority on the history of Jehovah's Witnesses in the Nazi era. This resulted in more than 1,000 court cases against Bible Students for “unauthorized peddling” by the end of the 1920s.”
http://www.answers.com/topic/persecution-of-jehovah-s-witnessesEvery country, even Germany, had those who did not believe in the Nazi ideology and who were willing to die for their beliefs. Perhaps no other group stood so firmly in their beliefs as the Jehovah Witnesses. Hitler felt very threatened by this strong group of Christians because they, from the very beginning, refused to recognize any God other than Jehovah. When asked to sign documents of loyalty to the Nazi ideology, they refused. Jehovah Witnesses were forced to wear purple armbands and thousands were imprisoned as “dangerous” traitors because they refused to take a pledge of loyalty to the Third Reich.
http://www.holocaustforgotten.com/Jehovah.htmOther groups deemed “racially inferior” or “undesirable”: Poles (6 million killed, of whom 3 million were Catholic/Christian, and the rest Jewish), Serbs (estimates vary between 500,000 and 1.2 million killed, mostly by Croat Ustaše), Soviet military prisoners of war and civilians in occupied territories including Russians and other East Slavs, the mentally or physically disabled, homosexuals, Blacks, Jehovah's Witnesses, Atheists,[citation needed] Communists and political dissidents, trade unionists, Freemasons, Eastern Christians, and Catholic and Protestant clergy, were also persecuted and killed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HolocaustAgain, it says that Protestant clergy were persecuted and killed. If they died because of refusing to engage in Hitler's regime because of biblical principles, I commend them. But why only the clergy?
Please go to this site:
http://www.answers.com/topic/nazi-concentration-camp-badgesAnd look at the triangles. Look at the different groups. And answer my question: If you were alive in that time, and living in Germany, which triangles would you have been wearing?
Casey, I'm not ignoring the rest of your post. But it covers many things. I will get back to it.
david
Quote Let's do a quick check of wickepedia.
“During the war, prisoners in the concentration camps included millions of Jews, along with Communists, hundreds of thousands of Poles, Soviet and other prisoners of war, homosexuals, gypsies, certain Catholics, some Jehovah's Witnesses, and others.”
Some of these groups were put there, obviously because Hitler considered them different, and not because of their religion. I find it odd that “certain Catholics” were there, but I guess it doesn't say why they were there. Hitler also tried to do away with all those who suffered from disabilities.
But JW's were the only group, THE ONLY GROUP that could have left if they signed a piece of paper denouncing their faith.
You're right. No real Christians joined Hitlers military campaign. Good point.David:
You seem like a really nice person! But Ive gotta tell you that you have been really decieved!
Worse than Nick.. :-).
My friend this is just Hoopla!
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 04 2006,06:58) Quote Let's do a quick check of wickepedia.
“During the war, prisoners in the concentration camps included millions of Jews, along with Communists, hundreds of thousands of Poles, Soviet and other prisoners of war, homosexuals, gypsies, certain Catholics, some Jehovah's Witnesses, and others.”
Some of these groups were put there, obviously because Hitler considered them different, and not because of their religion. I find it odd that “certain Catholics” were there, but I guess it doesn't say why they were there. Hitler also tried to do away with all those who suffered from disabilities.
But JW's were the only group, THE ONLY GROUP that could have left if they signed a piece of paper denouncing their faith.
You're right. No real Christians joined Hitlers military campaign. Good point.David:
You seem like a really nice person! But Ive gotta tell you that you have been really decieved!
Worse than Nick.. :-).
My friend this is just Hoopla!
Hi W,
You say I am deceived? Why do you say this? Do I not abide in the scriptures for you to say such things? If so I need to know where I am erring. Please tell me what I have said that is unscriptural.Quote You seem like a really nice person! But Ive gotta tell you that you have been really decieved! Worse than Nick.. :-).
My friend this is just Hoopla!
I'm sorry Worshipping Jesus, you failed to mention which other groups could have left if they signed a piece of paper renouncing their faith. If it is I who have been decieved, show me the piece of paper that others could have signed. Please do.
david
Quote (david @ Nov. 05 2006,00:19) It is a fact that the early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays. I dare you to prove otherwise. I double dare you. It's not a matter of picking quotes from the right sources. They didn't celebrate birthdays. They didn't just neglect to do so. They refused to do so, and this was based on their Bible trained consciences. My question to you: WERE THEY WRONG IN THEIR THINKING? Were the earliest Christians wrong?
david it is neither wrong or right in itself to celebrate a birthday. Wrong and right come from the heart.Arguing over dates, celebrations, genealogies, and such things is fruitless.
If a Christian celebrates a birthday and thanks the Lord for the day he was born, then he does it to the Lord. If he doesn't celebrate it to please God, then he does that for the Lord.
Why do people make issue of things that do not need to be decisive? Is not such activity unspiritual?
We know for example that some Christians didn't eat meat and yet if they do that to please God then that is where their faith is at and we are to respect that. Others eat meat because they have the faith to thank God for it, knowing that all things are now clean for us.
This demonstrates the danger to me of joining a denomination, cult, or adhering to a man-made creed. All that happens is one group says you have to do this, and another says you mustn't do that. All the while the important things get neglected and the enemy scores another victory even though Christ has put the keys in our hands.
Colossians 2:20-22
20 Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules:
21 “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”?
22 These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings.Quote Hi W,
You say I am deceived? Why do you say this? Do I not abide in the scriptures for you to say such things? If so I need to know where I am erring. Please tell me what I have said that is unscriptural.Hey Nick! I dont need to get in the discussion of the trinity with you, but as shure as you believe that I am in error for believing in a Triune God, I also believe you are in error! I have have my scriptural basis that I believe to be the truth as you do! Same concerning the Holy Spirit being a person! Or the eternal existance of The Son Jesus, Or the Omnipresence of the Lord!
But its ok, we can seek to be in unity in the Spirit by what we do agree on!
Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
[2] With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
[3] Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
[4] There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
[5] One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
[6] One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.Quote I'm sorry Worshipping Jesus, you failed to mention which other groups could have left if they signed a piece of paper renouncing their faith. If it is I who have been decieved, show me the piece of paper that others could have signed. Please do. david
Hey David! Im sorry I dont know what you are talking about!
I guess I dont understand the Importance of the JWs and Hitler letting them loose if they deny their faith in writing?
Plz explain?
Quote (t8 @ Nov. 04 2006,21:53) Quote (david @ Nov. 05 2006,00:19) It is a fact that the early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays. I dare you to prove otherwise. I double dare you. It's not a matter of picking quotes from the right sources. They didn't celebrate birthdays. They didn't just neglect to do so. They refused to do so, and this was based on their Bible trained consciences. My question to you: WERE THEY WRONG IN THEIR THINKING? Were the earliest Christians wrong?
david it is neither wrong or right in itself to celebrate a birthday. Wrong and right come from the heart.Arguing over dates, celebrations, genealogies, and such things is fruitless.
If a Christian celebrates a birthday and thanks the Lord for the day he was born, then he does it to the Lord. If he doesn't celebrate it to please God, then he does that for the Lord.
Why do people make issue of things that do not need to be decisive? Is not such activity unspiritual?
We know for example that some Christians didn't eat meat and yet if they do that to please God then that is where their faith is at and we are to respect that. Others eat meat because they have the faith to thank God for it, knowing that all things are now clean for us.
This demonstrates the danger to me of joining a denomination, cult, or adhering to a man-made creed. All that happens is one group says you have to do this, and another says you mustn't do that. All the while the important things get neglected and the enemy scores another victory even though Christ has put the keys in our hands.
Colossians 2:20-22
20 Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules:
21 “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”?
22 These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings.
Amen t8!Quote (david @ Nov. 03 2006,01:12) Hi Seeking truth, Quote Hi,
The JWs are often referred to as modern Arians. But Arius, for all his faults, did not come up with new doctrines such as Jesus being an angel called Michael, or all men being forgiven at death.These bizarre follies come from an approach to scripture that is poor and disordered lacking proper care with proofs and the seeking of witnessing evidence before the declaring of unscriptural and demonic doctrines.
Then they go door to door spreading these falsehoods without thought of the risks of doing such things to themselves and others.
–Nick
Seekingtruth, you write:
Quote the JW's seem to take pride in being hated, and true Christians will be, but I feel that the JW's make it a self fulfilling prophecy with attitudes, and presentations. No one had commented in the arians thread for a month. Then Nick says this which seems to come out of nowhere. Is that an attack? Am I to feel hated by it? How shall I feel?
I would feel that Nick has a difference of opinion. How is this any different then your insistence that I'm eager to slaughter my brothers in other countries? The attack was against your beliefs ,not you personally.David:
If the JWs teach that only the 144,000 need be born again as I believe you have stated, this teaching will cause those who have been deceived by this teaching to die in their sins.
There are other scriptures where I disagree with JWs beliefs as I told you and I will be happy to discuss my understanding of these scriptures in question, and we should try to come into unity in these, but the above is critical.
It is not my intention nor the Lord's to condemn anyone. Salvation is a gift from God, and that is what he and I want for everyone. I have already discussed with you the meaning of being born again, and under the present covenant with God no one can have a personal relationship with Him without being born again.
I intend to write to those at the headquarters of the Watchtower. They probably will not hear what is being said to them, but I feel that it is my responsibility to let them as I have let you know.
“When I say unto the wicked, thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I required at thy hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul”. (Ezekiel 3:18-19)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
