Jehovah's Witness Church

[david]

Quote

I guess I dont understand the Importance of the JWs and Hitler letting them loose if they deny their faith in writing? Plz explain?

Hi W

Hi W. Maybe I misunderstood your last post. You quoted me and said it was hoopla. And I had stated that we were the only group that could have left if we renounced our faith. I thought this is what you were referring to as hoopla. Maybe I misunderstood what the “hoopla” was you referred to.
I guess my point if any was this: You’re living or rather dying in a concentration camp. If you sign a piece of paper renouncing your faith, you are free to go. It’s not a trial many have faced. My point was that Jehovah’s Witnesses stood firm against the hitler regime. We didn’t salute hitler. We didn’t take part in the war. We remained no part of the world.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote

Hi W Hi W.  Maybe I misunderstood your last post.  You quoted me and said it was hoopla.  And I had stated that we were the only group that could have left if we renounced our faith.  I thought this is what you were referring to as hoopla.  Maybe I misunderstood what the “hoopla” was you referred to. I guess my point if any was this: You’re living or rather dying in a concentration camp.  If you sign a piece of paper renouncing your faith, you are free to go.  It’s not a trial many have faced.  My point was that Jehovah’s Witnesses stood firm against the hitler regime.  We didn’t salute hitler.  We didn’t take part in the war.  We remained no part of the world.

Hey David!

So you dont think their may have been others besides JWs that died for their faith there?

Blessings

[Proclaimer]

Mohammad Ali refused to go to the Vietnam war I think it was.

The point is that such things do not prove either way that a person has true faith or that an organisation is what it claims.

david, can you see beyond the visible. Can you see the invisible? Why do people need an organisation that they can touch and see.

The Body of Christ is not an organisation like that which is founded in this world. The visible parts are the bodies that the saints inhabit, yet they await a new body. But the true Kingdom is inside every true believer. You can't see the Kingdom with your physical eyes, only with the eyes of your heart. The only thing you can see with your physical eyes is the effect of the Kingdom.

Why do many seek a physical church, with a name chosen from themselves, with management like that of a business, and buildings like MacDonald franchises dotted around the worlds cities? Why do we think we need to choose from one of the organisations that the world offers?

It is because people are carnal and they need carnal things.

A carnal man cannot understand the things of the spirit.

[david]

Quote

So you dont think their may have been others besides JWs that died for their faith there?

Didn't say that. Perhaps you should read again what I did say.

[david]

Hi T8.

Quote

But the true Kingdom is inside every true believer.

This thought isn't really scriptural. It's a great misunderstanding of a scripture which if taken that way means that the pharisees and scribes whom Jesus condemned to Gehenna have the kingdom of God in them. And if they do, everyone does.

Quote

Mohammad Ali refused to go to the Vietnam war I think it was.

I'm not saying other people haven't gone to jail (did he) or a concentration camp for refusing to take part in war.
But as a group, Jehovah's Witnesses seem to be the only ones who unitedly stood firm against the hitler regime because of their faith, and convictions.
Sure, other people did. The Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, etc weren't in the concentration camps because of their faith. And while some Catholic clergy were in the camps, the great majority of Catholics were doing what? Killing?

Quote

It is because people are carnal and they need carnal things.

I guess that's the way a fleshly man would see it–fleshly. A spiritual man sees spiritual thing. A physical man sees the things of the flesh. You seem to only see the flesh.
But you don't seem to be able to peice together that we are made of flesh and must carry flesh and physical things around in order to live and operate. You need spiritual food. But you can't condemn physical food because you can see it. It's a needed thing. And for the great work Jesus fortold, we need tremendous organization and some physical things to keep things organized:
MATTHEW 24:14
“And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.”

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote

I guess that's the way a fleshly man would see it–fleshly.  A spiritual man sees spiritual thing.  A physical man sees the things of the flesh.  You seem to only see the flesh.   But you don't seem to be able to peice together that we are made of flesh and must carry flesh and physical things around in order to live and operate.  You need spiritual food.  But you can't condemn physical food because you can see it.  It's a needed thing.  And for the great work Jesus fortold, we need tremendous organization and some physical things to keep things organized: MATTHEW 24:14 “And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.”

David!

All I can say is I will make mention of you in my prayers;

That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of **wisdom and revelation** in the knowledge of him:
The **eyes of your understanding being enlightened**; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance is in the saints,
And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to usward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,….. Eph 1:16-19.

In His Kingdom!  Keith

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote

David! All I can say is I will make mention of you in my prayers; That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of **wisdom and revelation** in the knowledge of him: The **eyes of your understanding being enlightened**; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance is in the saints, And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to usward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,….. Eph 1:16-19. In His Kingdom!  Keith

David I do not say this in any way to condescend to you, because I truly care that you know Jesus Personally and have a real relationship with him! However you now your own heart and you only can know if you have a true genuine relationship with Christ or the Father Jehovah.

I nor any one else can be your judge but please know that as a believer we can now them by their fruit.

Sincerely my friend!

[Casey S Smith 29]

David:

I am quite intrigued sir as to why the majority and even priority of my latest and possibly my longest post was set aside (I did see though you are going to go through the post letter mind you) at the expense of what is the very least important matter – birthday's. Everything I stated I thought and let it simmer in my mind for some time so replying to my own post would be a waste of time. For now though assuming you are not ignoring my extensive paragraph, I will give you the courtesy of responding to.

Birthdays? I think t8 summed up so eloquently in such a small paragraph better than I was trying in my long paragrpah. You however, said that t8 was fleshly and viewing birthday matters as fleshly. Apparently you did not grasp what t8 and myself are trying to say in regards to this one day a year set aside by some as important.

Colossians 2 ESV

16Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 17These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. 18Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions,[d] puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, 19and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. 20If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations– 21″Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” 22(referring to things that all perish as they are used)–according to human precepts and teachings? 23These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.

1 Corinthians 6 ESV
12″All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be enslaved by anything. 13″Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”–and God will destroy both one and the other.

1 Corinthians 8 ESV
7However, not all possess this knowledge. But some, through former association with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. 9But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. 10For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating[c] in an idol's temple, will he not be encouraged,[d] if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols? 11And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. 12Thus, sinning against your brothers[e] and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. 13Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.

1 Corinthians 10 ESV
23″All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. 24Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor. 25Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 26For “the earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof.” 27If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 28But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience– 29I do not mean your conscience, but his. For why should my liberty be determined by someone else's conscience? 30If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?

31So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. 32Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God, 33just as I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be saved.

You mentioned that some of these verses are referring to the Jewish customs of worship. How much more then are customs that have NOTHING to do with any form of worship considered not, not appropriate?

You said I did not answer your three questions. It did not seem worthy of any large discussion. No, I have not studied where the birthday's have come from…I saw and see no need to. It is a day that some find to be a day of fun.

It is a day to some of having made it one more year by God's Grace. You illustrate the expense of birthday's for funerals applying Solomon's wise words in Ecclesiastes (which I find very comical since almost every JW I have spoken with makes discussions out of that book and Ecclesiastes is my favorite book of Scripture) that going to a house of mourning is wiser than going to a house of feasting for death is the end of all man and the living should take this to heart. Solomon is not saying that people should go to funerals their whole lives, he is saying that a funeral is more beneficial in the scope of eternity. He is not knocking birthday's. If you read the entire 12 chapters of Ecclesiastes and you come out with the idea we should not celebrate birthday's then you clearly did not pay attention to the flow of thought Solomon wa sspeaking of at the end of his days.

You have also in some manner challenged me to stop celebrating my birthday or implying that I NEVER have. You spoke with a very bad assumption sir. I did not celebrate my birthday for years and years. Even now it is just another day to me. I don't want people blowing money on me that day. For my little ones though, it is special. They made it to be a little bigger person. Wow, my little girl is 5…6…7…and now about to be eight. Actually, it makes me reflect on how fast time flies and during that day I realize how precious those days are with my little ones.

The result of you placing high importance on birthday's just goes to show the extreme legalism and work salvation that JW's have to bear, leaving Christ's finished work of no effect. Whether I celebrate this day or not has NO AFFECT on my relationship with God. God is not going to keep me out of His Kingdom because I celebrated this day or any other day for that matter.

You also compared my disdain for “Easter” and implied I was using a double standard. Your implicaiton falls short. To make a day in which the Messiah of the World took upon Himself the sins of mankind and give it to bunnies and eggs stemming from a pagan fesitval is the worst event ever committed. Christmas focuses on His Birth. Yeah, you have treese and some people have a Santa Clause and yeah, you have a lot who miss out on the importance of His coming, but even those that do not comprehend what Christmas is for, they end of realizing it eventually for you cannot hear the songs sung at this time of year without hearing of OUR LORD.

Now, you have neglected to respond as to why witnesses worship on Sunday, a day of the Sun, a day in centuries past in which Rome made for “Church” services. Sounds like a very large double standard to me. By the way, where do your hymns come from? Where did the rhythm descend from?

If you look at your own organization founded my men of flesh, you will see a trace of pagan or smell a stench of secularism.

Now just a few simple comments in regard to armed forces.

When you see Islamic extremist who wish to erase Israel off the map, which flags are they burning? American and Israel's? Why? Because these two countries in their eyes are the great Satan that you spoke of, because America will stand up and defend Israel against ALL OTHER NATIONS! If it wasn't for the USA, Israel
would not exist, well, YHWH would have defended her somehow but He is using us. I will speak more of this subject later on.

[david]

Quote

I am quite intrigued sir as to why the majority and even priority of my latest and possibly my longest post was set aside (I did see though you are going to go through the post letter mind you) at the expense of what is the very least important matter – birthday's.

It was just the subject we had been discussing and I thought people were being unfair with it. As well, I find that it's much quicker to get the easier less important matters out of the way. You'll notice I do that a lot on this forum.
Casey, I should mention that you only seem to speak with me on here and really only on the subject of JW's. I have a variety of interests and more than one person on here is conversing with me. The best way for me to answer the rest of your post quickly is to not ask anything else. We are now back onto multiple subjects and that may be partly my fault. It's one reason I sometimes prefer to speak of things in other threads. Most of the info on this thread have their own subjects. But when lots of people on here post things in the JW thread, it starts to tire me out, or wear me down.

On birthdays, you haven't answered a single question I asked, and nor has anyone. It's most telling. The early Christians must have looked at the scriptures you put down wrongly, I guess. Or perhaps YOU are looking at things wrongly. One of you is.

david

Quote

How much more then are customs that have NOTHING to do with any form of worship considered not, not appropriate?

This is simply wrong. Saying that the customs of birthdays have nothing to do with worship is the same as saying the customs of easter bunnies and eggs have nothing to do with worship. Sure, to most the significance has been lost. But these practices are odd when you think about them and if you cared enough to question them, you'd find they are all linked to pagan ungodly unbiblical practices that God has seen firsthand.

You find an old pair of gloves in an old box in your attic. You wear them without knowing where they came from. They were given to you by your grandfather who got them from who knows where. Does it matter where they came from in the least? They're just gloves. Who cares? Who cares if they were Hitler's gloves for example? Does it matter? Look at me! I'm wearing Hitler's gloves. But I try not to think about it, so it's ok. I'm wearing the gloves of someone that killed and tortured. Who cares? They're only gloves. That was years ago, you say. I guess you could look at it that way. That was years ago. To you, it was years ago. To some, it's still haunts them. To Jehovah, the ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS, the one that matters more than your birthday cake or your stomach or your fun, to Jehovah, he knows where these things came from. And they are disgusting to him. Does not that matter at all? They're just gloves. Who cares? I'd say Jehovah cares. I'd say his caring is the only thing that matters. But that's just me. Wear the gloves. Have the cake. Eat it too. Jehovah knows.

[david]

Quote

You said I did not answer your three questions. It did not seem worthy of any large discussion. No, I have not studied where the birthday's have come from…I saw and see no need to. It is a day that some find to be a day of fun.

Ya, I don't think the rest of your comments are worthy of any large discussion either. That's why I'm thinking I won't answer them. I did not raised them and repeat them twice because I thought they were “unworthy” of discussing. Or perhaps it was because no one could tell me the answers. Or perhaps no one wanted to even consider the implications of the questions I raised.
If they are so unworthy of discussion, why not just answer the three questions raised and we can be done with it.

Here they are again for anyone who missed them:

“”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? WHERE THEY WRONG IN THEIR THINKING?

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 have not studied where the birthday's have come from…I saw and see no need to.” you say.

And scriptures such as this?

1 THESSALONIANS 5:21,22
“Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine. Abstain from every form of wickedess”

Halloween is also a day that some find to be fun. It's also a day when 100 people in the America's are sacrificed and many more in Europe. It's also a day with dark orgins. But as you say, its a day that many have some fun. So, it's ok, I guess, according to the fact that some people have some fun on that day. Some people also have some fun breaking all kinds of God's principles. Some people find that fun. But as long as they're having fun…who cares that it's satanic. Who cares what the origins may be?

Quote

If you read the entire 12 chapters of Ecclesiastes and you come out with the idea we should not celebrate birthday's then you clearly did not pay attention to the flow of thought Solomon wa sspeaking of at the end of his days.

Well I don't remember saying that the entire Book of Ecclesiastes was a denunciation on birthdays or anything remotely like that. I was looking at one scripture and discerning the principle or basic truth behind it. What that scripture was saying is that the day of ones death is much more meaningful than the day of ones birth. And no, that of course doesn't say we shouldn't celebrate birthdays, but it merely points out the some may understand the truth behind that scripture and not focus so much on it.

Quote

You have also in some manner challenged me to stop celebrating my birthday or implying that I NEVER have. You spoke with a very bad assumption sir. I did not celebrate my birthday for years and years. Even now it is just another day to me. I don't want people blowing money on me that day. For my little ones though, it is special. They made it to be a little bigger person. Wow, my little girl is 5…6…7…and now about to be eight. Actually, it makes me reflect on how fast time flies and during that day I realize how precious those days are with my little ones.

I have more respect for a person that stops smoking because of Biblical principles than for someone who stops smoking because it costs a lot. I am sorry. I actually remember now you saying you hadn't celebrated birthdays for some time. I've never said there's anything wrong with reflecting on your childs age or development or growth. It's the paganism that Satan has wrapped these things in that bother me. Everything in the world, he wrapps in a nice little bow and makes them seem so innnocent.

1 JOHN 2:15-17
“Do not be loving either the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; because everything in the world—the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the showy display of one’s means of life—does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world. Furthermore, the world is passing away and so is its desire, but he that does the will of God remains forever.”

Quote

Whether I celebrate this day or not has NO AFFECT on my rel ationship with God.

Perhaps in your mind. But perhaps God wonders why you don't care that the worldly customs you involve your children in come from idolatry. Perhaps he thinks you don't consider that important. Perhaps he wonders why.
If Hitler was God's enemy and you decided that wearing his gloves was ok, because they were “just gloves” and “that was a long time ago,” Jehovah may see it a little differently.

Quote

Yeah, you have treese and some people have a Santa Clause and yeah, you have a lot who miss out on the importance of His coming, but even those that do not comprehend what Christmas is for, they end of realizing it eventually for you cannot hear the songs sung at this time of year without hearing of OUR LORD.

Hearing the name Jesus sung in annoying Christmas songs for 5 months does not a Christian make. Most who claim to be Christian are annoyed by them after 3 weeks. A lot of those songs too are based on lies and present things wrongly.

Why did Jesus say he was born?

JOHN 18:37
“…For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth.””

Born to bear witness to the truth. People take that birth and cover it in lies from top to bottom. How does he feel about that? Jesus likes truth. Simple. Jesus likes truth. He doesn't like lies. Christmas is packed with lies and paganism as well. Does Jesus like paganism? Does he? Does Jesus like lies? Well?

Quote

Now, you have neglected to respond as to why witnesses worship on Sunday, a day of the Sun, a day in centuries past in which Rome made for “Church” services. Sounds like a very large double standard to me. By the way, where do your hymns come from? Where did the rhythm descend from?

So now you're mad that I stated correctly that that the birthday celebration and birthdays customs are pagan. So you have to try your hardest to find paganism with us. Sad.
We have meetings three times a week. The weekend of course is an excellent day for one or actually two of those meetings as many have that day off, naturally. Many go out in the ministry on Saturday (and on Sunday too.) But yes, you got us. We have a meeting on Sunday. We also have one on Moon day (god of the moon) and some on tuesday (mardi in french) mars, and on wednesday (based on another false god.)

Of course, we are to be no part of the world. But that doesn't mean steppoing out of it. It means avoiding worldly customs the best we can when we can. And if you can't stop celebrating peoples birthdays because of fear of man or tradition, I do understand. Thats normal in the world.

Our music, we made up. We created it.

Quote

If you look at your own organization founded my men of flesh, you will see a trace of pagan or smell a stench of secularism.

There's a difference between saying: “who cares, it's fun,” with your eyes closed, and trying to avoid things as best you can.

Quote

If it wasn't for the USA, Israel would not exist, well, YHWH would have defended her somehow but He is using us.

This feels like a touchy subject with you and you seem somewhat proud of your nation, nationalistic. I tend to look to God's government for the solutions. The US won't stand forever.

DANIEL 2:44
““And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;”

david

[david]

Hi Casey. I've been looking through your post again.

Quote

In the end of this post I think there are a few main points. 1)The Kingdom of God that Jesus proclaimed was the Kingdom of His Father. 1a) This kingdom is a heavenly domain. 1b) The requirement for ALL PEOPLE to enter this Kingdom is to be born again.

I don't think either of disagree on point 1 at all. Point 1a that the kingdom is a heavenly domain I also completely agree with. It's called the kingdom of the heavens. Those who make up this kingdom will be in heaven, with Christ, as their associate rulers. (many on this forum disagree believing that no one ever will go to heaven, ever.)
Point 1b, the requirement for all the people who enter his kingdom is to be born again, yes.
I still would like an expansion on what you meant by this when I asked who they would be ruling over. I asked it somewhere else in my last post I think. I didn’t really understand your reply.

Quote

Here is the misunderstanding I think you and all witnesses seem to miss. If indeed Jesus came here to proclaim the Kingdom to be set up then He would have done so. Yet, we find just the opposite in Scripture. We find that the people rallied to make Jesus their king. What did He do? He fled. Why? Because the Kingdom He was proclaiming was a Kingdom of God – A Kingdom of Heaven. As he spoke to Pontius Pilate: “Are you the king of the Jews?”, “It is as you say…my kingdom is not of this world.” Jesus did not come here to proclaim an earthly kingdom. He came here to proclaim a kingdom message (that was not of this earth) that ONLY THE ELECT COULD RECEIVE and not the people. Jesus said that ALL the Father would draw unto Him, WILL COME. He in no wise would cast them away. No one could snatch Him out of His hand, No one can snatch him out of His Father’s hand, they are one. (I have seen the comment of “once saved always saved” spoken a few times. I adhere to the concept, but the axiom is incorrect…that would be another discussion for another day). My point is Jesus came to die…His message was given to the elect; His words likewise will judge the non-elect. When the apostles spread the message, like you, they misunderstood that the kingdom of God would be on earth but unlike you, consisting of Jews alone. They had no inclination that the Gentiles would inherit the Kingdom.

There are some definite misunderstandings here:

Quote

If indeed Jesus came here to proclaim the Kingdom to be set up then He would have done so. Yet, we find just the opposite in Scripture. We find that the people rallied to make Jesus their king. What did He do? He fled. Why? Because the Kingdom He was proclaiming was a Kingdom of God – A Kingdom of Heaven.

Casey, we realize that this kingdom is heavenly. It's sometimes called the heavenly kingdom. Heaven was not originally where God put Adam and Eve. He made them flesh and put them on the earth, in a paradise. Had they not disobeyed, they could have followed their commision to mulitply and fill the earth and could have thuse turned the entire earth into a paradise. Heaven was not mentioned as a reward for their faith. Death was spoken of as a punishment for their disloyalty. And Jesus (mat 5:5) and several other places in the Bible show that that is still God's purpose for mankind. Satan didn't thwart that purpose. But because of what happnened, God set up a subsiduary rulership, the kingdom. He lovingly decided that it should be ruled by those who have faced the challenges knwon to us. These are the ones that rule over the earth. Not everyone need be in that government. Only a select few.

Quote

1c) The central message of the apostles that were to ALL PEOPLE (not to a small 144,000) was first spoken of by Peter (the keys of the kingdom were given to Him…what are those keys David?); He used the OT prophecies to show the disbelieving Jews how the Christ was to suffer at there hands and be resurrected. The Jews pricked of their heart were commanded to: REPENT, BE BAPTIZED IN JESUS NAME, RECEIVE THE SPIRIT OF GOD. After these requirements if you will, were met – THEN the kingdom message and the words of Christ were taught and the Scriptures were studied which were only at this time OT Scriptures since not one of the NT letters had been written.

You’ll notice many of the letters are written to the holy ones or saints. Some on here have expressed the belief that there seems to be a distinction between these holy ones, that they are a class of people. I believe I posted on this in the “people of the holy ones” thread.
Peter used “keys” entrusted to him to open up (to Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles) the opportunity to receive God’s spirit with a view to their entering the heavenly Kingdom.

Quote

2) The 144,000 are virgin Israelites – not Gentiles and not married Gentiles especially.

Hmmm. So Peter and the apostles aren’t among these then? Interesting.

Quote

3) The Jews WILL be grafted back in and their promises stemmed from Abraham on will be fulfilled in God’s timing.

Jewish Christians were likewise amazed when Jehovah “for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name.” (Acts 10:44-48; 15:14) This was a clear sign, however, that the outworking of God’s purpose did not depend on any one nation. No, for “in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.”—Acts 10:35.
The apostle Paul likens the congregation of the Jewish candidates naturally in line for the heavenly Kingdom to an olive tree with a definite number of branches attached to the tree trunk. Wild olive branches (people of the nations, Gentiles) were grafted in to replace “broken off” natural branches (Jews) because only a few accepted Christ, the majority failing. Thus the full God-ordained number is completed, in its final state being composed of Jews and Gentiles.—Ro 11:17-24.
Such a procedure in grafting would, of course, be “contrary to nature.” The natural branches corresponded to the Jews who, because of their lack of faith, as a nation, lost out on their opportunity to be among those in line for Messiah’s heavenly Kingdom. The grafting of wild olive branches, or non-Jewish Christians, into the garden olive to replace “natural branches” was no reason for those Gentiles to have lofty ideas, for only by faith could they maintain their position. Also, the grafting of branches from the wild olive into the garden olive illustrates the permanent union that has been effected between Jews and Gentiles as fellow members of “the Israel of God.”—Ro 11:17-24; Ga 3:28; 6:16; compare Joh 15:1-6;
At Romans 9:6 Paul adds: “However, it is not as though the word of God [to Abraha
m] had failed. For not all who spring from [natural] Israel ARE REALLY ‘ISRAEL.’’” Note what Paul is saying: that because the Jews rejected Christ, God no longer considered them to be Israel! The anointed congregation of Jesus Christ’s followers was now the real “Israel,” the instrument through which God would bless all mankind.—1 Peter 2:9; Galatians 3:29; 6:16; Genesis 22:18.

(The above actually deserves it’s own discussion and I’ve had this discussion before a couple times on here. I have no idea which threads though.)

Quote

4) GOD IN HIS SOVEREIGNTY DECREED ALL OF THE EVENTS FROM ADAM AND EVE TO THIS CURRENT TIME. NOTHING IS OUTSIDE OF HIS WILL, NOTHING SHOCKS HIM, NOTHING SURPRISES HIM…HIS PLANS WILL SUCCEED. SATAN HAS NO AUTHORITY OUTSIDE OF WHAT GOD HAS GIVEN HIM WHICH IS LIMITED AT BEST.

If you believe that God planned for Adam to sin, that’s it’s own subject. (A lot of these things should be their own subjects.) Nothing is outside of his will, you say? Sodom and Gomorrah? The days of Noah? Rape? All part of his will? Why do we pray for his will to take place if nothing is outside of his will?
I guess you could mean that it’s all part of his plan, and so things like rape have their place in his will? That seems wrong to me.
Of course his plans will succeed. It shouldn’t even be called a plan. “I plan to do this.” “I plan to do that.” Jehovah purposes to do things. He doesn’t plan to do them.
Of course Satan has only been granted authority from Jehovah to prove his claims, and that is limited….but it is not little.
He is three times called the “ruler of the world,” in scripture. The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one, the Bible says. He is misleading the entire inhabited earth, the Bible says. He is the very god of this system of things the Bible says. He is both world ruler and the world’s god. But the world will be done away with, the Bible says.

Quote

In conclusion I see a trend in the witnesses that set you up for error from the original premise of your founder’s doctrine. God planned for ALL this to happen for one which I have stressed I think well enough.

I guess we should make this it’s own subject. Because God did not plan for people to suffer torture or rape or murder or sufferings or death or loss of loved ones or crime or disease. None of these things are part of God’s purpose for mankind.

DEUTERONOMY 32:5
“They have acted ruinously on their own part; They are not his children, the defect is their own. A generation crooked and twisted!”
ECCLESIASTES 7:29
“See! This only I have found, that the [true] God made mankind upright, but they themselves have sought out many plans.””
Here is what God set before Adam and Eve: “Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving upon the earth.” “And Jehovah God also laid this command upon the man: ‘From every tree of the garden you may eat to satisfaction. But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die.’” (Gen. 1:28; 2:16, 17) Would you encourage your children to undertake a project with a marvelous future, knowing from the start that it was doomed to failure? Would you warn them of harm, while knowing that you had planned everything so that they were sure to come to grief? Is it reasonable, then, to attribute such to God?
Matt. 7:11: “If you, although being wicked [or, “bad as you are,” NE], know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will your Father who is in the heavens give good things to those asking him?”
If God foreordained and foreknew Adam’s sin and all that would result from this, it would mean that by creating Adam, God deliberately set in motion all the wickedness committed in human history. He would be the Source of all the wars, the crime, the immorality, the oppression, the lying, the hypocrisy, the disease. But the Bible clearly says: “You are not a God taking delight in wickedness.” (Ps. 5:4) “Anyone loving violence His soul certainly hates.” (Ps. 11:5) “God . . . cannot lie.” (Titus 1:2) “From oppression and from violence he [the One designated by God as Messianic King] will redeem their soul, and their blood will be precious in his eyes.” (Ps. 72:14) “God is love.” (1 John 4:8) “He is a lover of righteousness and justice.”—Ps. 33:5.

Casey, all these things deserve a discussion in themselves. Each of these things could use a couple hours of discussing and looking at the whole Bible. Too much is listed for me to give enough consideration to everything you say.
The problem is now you have to respond to the 14 thnings I've just written with 14 things of your own. This doesn't work for me.

david

[Casey S Smith 29]

Quote

To Jehovah, the ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS, the one that matters more than your birthday cake or your stomach or your fun, to Jehovah, he knows where these things came from. And they are disgusting to him. Does not that matter at all?…I'd say Jehovah cares. I'd say his caring is the only thing that matters…Have the cake. Eat it too. Jehovah knows.

You are very staunch on this birthday deal and I am dumbfounded as to why. When I said your questions were not worth discussing I meant because it is not an eternal issue. By your standards someones eternal destiny rides on whether one celebrates their birthday. Do you not see how rediculous this thinking is? “Well my son, I would let you in, I mean you did believe in my Son, you did repent and were baptized, I did save you by My Spirit, you did follow Jesus and His teachings…but you celebrated one too many birthdays so I can't let you in…”

…but as to your comments:

Quote

To Jehovah, the ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS…stomach…to Jehovah, he knows where these things came from. And they are disgusting to him…Have the cake. Eat it too.QUOTE] …I will let the Scriptures that you seem to ignore speak for God; my opinion seems very minute and puny compared to what the Scriptures can most assuredly defend, though they need not to defend themselves: 1 Corinthians 6 ESV 12″All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be enslaved by anything. 13″Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”–and God will destroy both one and the other. 1 Corinthians 10 ESV 23″All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. 24Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor. 25Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 26For “the earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof.” 27If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 28But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience– 29I do not mean your conscience, but his. For why should my liberty be determined by someone else's conscience? 30If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks? I wonder what Paul would say? Considering that the meat that was in question was actually served to demons and Paul said, “It's ok to eat it…” I am sure without a hint of doubt that Paul would say, “Birthdaycake? Go ahead I like Chocolate…” I can't help but notice you said: …your stomach…

I wonder what Scripture said again?

1 Corinthians 6 ESV

12″All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be enslaved by anything. 13″Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”–and God will destroy both one and the other.

…food is meant for the STOMACH…STOMACH…God will destroy…

…even a stomach that has birthday cake in it. Yes David, that stomach will be abliterated.

Quote

Ya, I don't think the rest of your comments are worthy of any large discussion either. That's why I'm thinking I won't answer them. I did not raised them and repeat them twice because I thought they were “unworthy” of discussing. Or perhaps it was because no one could tell me the answers. Or perhaps no one wanted to even consider the implications of the questions I raised. If they are so unworthy of discussion, why not just answer the three questions raised and we can be done with it.

Actually, I did answer them. You said that I obviously have to attack or poke you or something like that because I know you are right about pagan origins in relation to your Sunday worship comment. Let's say you are right. So with that said, birthday's derive from paganism from somwhere. JW's will not celebrate it. By your argument God condemns birthdays. Conculsion: Everyone who celebrates birthday's is going to gehenna.

You don't get it David. Christ and us Christians overcome the world. We infilltrate the world. All Satan can do is poison and taint the truth and make a counterfeit. So you say Christmas in which I sit my family down that morning and read from the first chapters of Mathew and Luke to my wife and children; that very Christmas is a pagan celebration. The very fact that if Christ had not come, Christ could not have died means nothing to witnesses it seems. So, because (by your argument) this holiday is pagan, let's stop it and remove it totally. Let's do away with any sort of day that has bearing from the Son of God Himself. Let's stop singing those “annoying” Christmas songs that most are praises unto the Father Himself. Because the pagans took what was real, the Birth of Christ and formed a pagan day around it, let's let Satan prevail and His Kingdom claim that day for all time. Let's let Satan have all the days for that matter. Since he is so well at being deceitful and distorting then by your standards he can keep the whole calender. So the poor believers who wanted to celebrate their Saviour's coming had to make it a holiday that pagan recognized, let's get rid of it totally.

If you do that David you have to do a whole lot more than that sir. Do you shop at Walmart? Do you know they are trying to help gay marriage rights? So with every penny you spend their you are contributing to their cause. Do you pay taxes? Some of those taxes pay for casino's and abortion clinics.

What I am trying to say is we have to live in a fallen world. You keep saying over and over again you will depend on Jehovah's kingdom to obliterate these evil Nations but what you don't see is Jehovah is using these Nations like a pon in His Hands. God takes the weak and vile things of the world to shame the wise. Witnesses act like this world is going to hell in a hand basket so they shouldn't vote or have any influence in government. You all act like God is not using His army of believers like myself to make a difference in the world politically; politically to the point where my tiny little American vote can affect which candidate represents God's laws the best. If we believers don't vote David, then we mine as well sit back and let the world duke it out like you witnesses do because they're all going to hell. Because of my vote, one of the most wretched, vile, evil man in history as the likes of Hitler, is going to die for the evil he has committed. Don't fool yourself, God's justice is being done now. You witnesses think it won't be done until you see Jesus sitting on a throne in Jerusalem. If witnesses voted for the person who is willing to be in government for the Glory of God, the Kingdom coming that you pray for could come a lot quicker.

You aren't going to answer my questions huh? I am not surprised anymore by you David. If you run into a wall where someone on here makes a point you haven't investigated or you can't give a reason why they are w
rong, all you do is run from it and start answering another post that you think you can answer.

The fact is David, witnesses think they have the answer for EVERYTHING. They foolishly believe they have ALL the answers that doctors and theologians of the past pray and search for. As if for 1900 years followers of Christ were blind grasping in the dark and then Russell comes on the scene and here comes THE ANSWER! Others of us out here are searching for more of God. We don't follow men's traditions or creeds. We think they are helpful only as far as helpful can get us. We don't hold them to be Sola God like you witnesses to with your Watchtower. A cult submits to it's founder. You are not a witness for Jehovah…you are a pon for James Taze Russell. Beware of false prophets.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (david @ Nov. 07 2006,11:55)

Quote But the true Kingdom is inside every true believer. This thought isn't really scriptural. It's a great misunderstanding of a scripture which if taken that way means that the pharisees and scribes whom Jesus condemned to Gehenna have the kingdom of God in them. And if they do, everyone does.

Luke 17:21
nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you.”

I never said that the Kingdom was inside everyone. I said inside every believer.

[NickHassan]

Hi t8,

JWs only believe in a kingdom beginning at the return of the King.

But I agree t8.

Those who are reborn into the King,
feeding on the words of life and doing the will of God
are already serving that King and his God in the kingdom of heaven.

Lk 16
“16”The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it.”

[david]

Hi Casey.

Quote

“Well my son, I would let you in, I mean you did believe in my Son, you did repent and were baptized, I did save you by My Spirit, you did follow Jesus and His teachings…but you celebrated one too many birthdays so I can't let you in…”

I believe that to “repent” means to feel regret,for what one has done or omitted to do or to change ones mind with regard to past actions of conduct. If you are celebrating Halloween as a different more obvious example and suddenly realize that this is wrong, you should change or repent of that action. If you say: “Oh well,” then you haven't actually repented.

Sorry Casey, I want to comment on what T8 said. It will just take a second.

LET'S LOOK AT THE VERSE BEFORE too.

LUKE 17:20-21
“But on BEING ASKED by the PHARISEES when the kingdom of God was coming, he answered them and said: “The kingdom of God is not coming with striking observableness, neither will people be saying, ‘See here!’ or, ‘There!’ For, look! the kingdom of God is in YOUR midst.””

Or, as NIV or KJ say, “is within you.”

Notice Jesus was talking to the Pharisees.
In this regard The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible states: “Although frequently cited as an example of Jesus’ ‘mysticism’ or ‘inwardness,’ this interpretation rests chiefly upon the old translation, ‘within you,’ . . . understood in the unfortunate modern sense of ‘you’ as singular; the ‘you’ . . . is plural (Jesus is addressing the Pharisees—vs. 20) . . . The theory that the kingdom of God is an inner state of mind, or of personal salvation, runs counter to the context of this verse, and also to the whole N[ew] T[estament] presentation of the idea.”

A footnote to Luke 17:21 in the NIV shows that Jesus’ words could be rendered: “The kingdom of God is among you.” Other Bible translations read: “The kingdom of God is among you” or “is in the midst of you.” (The New English Bible; The Jerusalem Bible; Revised Standard Version) Jesus did not mean that the Kingdom was in the hearts of the proud Pharisees whom he was addressing. Did Jesus mean that the Kingdom was in the wicked hearts of those corrupt men, the very ones he condemned to Gehenna? Rather, as the long-awaited Messiah and King-Designate, Jesus was in their very midst. Far from being something that a person has in his heart, God’s Kingdom is a real, operating government having a ruler and subjects.

All I'm saying is that the idea that the kingdom of God is inside people or inside believers as T8 says, isn't really based on anything other than what seems to be a not very good way to translate that one scripture.
If you look at that scripture and say as T8, that it doesn't mean the kingdom is “in” everyone, but only in believers, then why did Jesus say those words to the Pharisees?
Clearly, it's a misunderstanding of the original Greek. It could just as easily be rendered “among you” or “in your midst.” Since we know that God's government isn't in the hearts of the pharisees whom Jesus asked how they could flee from God's judgment, that means it must be translated as “among you” or some similar sense. “Within you” means that the kingdom of God (his government) is in the pharisees, an impossibility because first, it's a kingdom or government and secondly because he was speaking to the pharisees.

Ok, back to Casey.

Quote

Actually, I did answer them.

I didn't really notice that. Actually, it seems you totally avoided my questions completely and didn't even hint at answering them. I could post them again if you like.

Let's look at the scriptures you put down:

1 CORINTHIANS 6:12-13
“All things are lawful for me; but not all things are advantageous. All things are lawful for me; but I will not let myself be brought under authority by anything. Foods for the belly, and the belly for foods; but God will bring both it and them to nothing. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord is for the body.”

1 CORINTHIANS 10:23-29
“All things are lawful; but not all things are advantageous. All things are lawful; but not all things build up. Let each one keep seeking, not his own [advantage], but that of the other person. Everything that is sold in a meat market keep eating, making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience; for “to Jehovah belong the earth and that which fills it.” If anyone of the unbelievers invites YOU and YOU wish to go, proceed to eat everything that is set before YOU, making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience. But if anyone should say to YOU: “This is something offered in sacrifice,” do not eat on account of the one that disclosed it and on account of conscience. “Conscience,” I say, not your own, but that of the other person. For why should it be that my freedom is judged by another person’s conscience?”

Let's reason on this scripture:
Consider the apostle’s words: “All things are lawful for me; but not all things are advantageous. All things are lawful for me; but I will not let myself be brought under authority by anything.” The apostle mentions as an example the eating of food. Nothing could be more clearly established as right. But Paul points out that if the eating of certain foods creates an issue with others in the congregation, the Christian should be willing to give way.

Paul obviously did not mean in saying that all things are lawfull that it is lawful to do things that God’s Word expressly condemns. Compared to the some 600 laws given to ancient Israel, there are comparatively few explicit commands regulating Christian life. Hence, many matters are left to individual conscience. Casey, as you say, a person who has made a dedication to Jehovah enjoys the freedom that results from guidance by God’s spirit. Having made the truth his own, a Christian follows his Bible-trained conscience and relies on God’s direction by holy spirit. This helps the dedicated Christian to determine what will “build up” and be “advantageous” for himself and others. He realizes that the decisions he makes will affect his personal relationship with God, to whom he is dedicated.

What God created and designated for a certain purpose, such as food, is fine, and the Christian may eat any of it without sinning—it is clean. But some, especially among the Jewish members of the early Christian congregation, had consciences weak on the point of foods that had been prohibited under the Mosaic law. (Acts 10:14, 15)
Even though other Christians explained the matter, long usage and custom made it hard for their consciences to consider such food clean. Of course, they did not have to eat it. But someone else might realize that God had declared the Law to be abolished on the basis of Christ’s sacrifice, and that therefore all foods were “legal” and clean. He could therefore eat wholeheartedly, thanking God for his provisions.
However, should the Christian having this knowledge eat in the presence of the Jewish Christian? Paul answers:

“If because of food your brother is being grieved, you are no longer walking in accord with love. Do not by your food ruin that one for whom Christ died.”—Rom. 14:15.

While the example used here is food, the principle covers anything that we might have a right to do, and yet is an optional matter.

Now, consider what this scripture is actually talking about.
Those words at 1 Corinthians 10:25 refer to meat that might h
ave been from an animal sacrificed at an idol temple. Back then, excess meat from temples was disposed of by being sold to merchants, who might include it among their supply of meat for sale in their stores. Paul’s point was that meat from a temple was not intrinsically bad or contaminated. Evidently it was customary to drain and use on the pagan altars the blood of animals sacrificed there. So if some of the excess meat was sold in a market, with no obvious link to a temple or the misconceptions of pagans, Christians could simply buy it as commercial meat that was clean and that had been suitably drained of blood.

What this scripture seems to say in connection with what we're talking about, is that there's nothing intrinsically wrong with Cake, or candles, which of course there aren't, even if they had been used for a pagan celebration. My dad uses candles for a birthday party. The next day, I take them and use them. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with candles.

But the birthday celebration itself, is another matter. God does not condone paganism or idolatry. That is why the early Christians considered birthdays to be avoided.

Quote

I wonder what Paul would say? Considering that the meat that was in question was actually served to demons and Paul said, “It's ok to eat it…” I am sure without a hint of doubt that Paul would say, “Birthdaycake? Go ahead I like Chocolate…”

History shows that you are unequivocally wrong. The early Christians avoided the birthday celebration completely.
Here's where you completely misunderstand that scripture. PAUL WOULD SAY IT'S OK TO EAT THE MEAT, but don't if it bothers someone elses conscience. But HE WOULDN'T SAY partake in the sacrificing to demons, WOULD HE? That's a completley different thing, isn't it? YES.

So moving on, I asked you some questions that you seem unwilling to think about. It bothers me that no one is going to answer those questions.

Quote

By your argument God condemns birthdays. Conculsion: Everyone who celebrates birthday's is going to gehenna. You don't get it David.

I fear you don't get it.

1 JOHN 5:19
“We know we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the [power of the] wicked one.”

You don't “get” this scripture. You don't believe it.

Nor do you believe that Satan is called the “ruler of the world” three times.

1 JOHN 2:15-17
“Do not be loving either the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; because everything in the world—the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the showy display of one’s means of life—does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world. Furthermore, the world is passing away and so is its desire, but he that does the will of God remains forever.”

I would think seriously about the above scripture and consider that to not pass away with the world, you may have to give some things up, things that you love, things the world loves.

Another question: How many did Jesus say would take note of the danger approaching? Didn't he say it would be like the days of Noah and that they “took no note.” This, in spite of the fortold preaching work. (mat 24)

Quote

Christ and us Christians overcome the world.

Yes, they do. And false Christians love the world and embrace it and become a part of it. Sad. See the above scriptures again.

Quote

All Satan can do is poison and taint the truth and make a counterfeit.

Yes, that he does for certain and he can also and does mislead the “entire inhabited earth.” (rev 12:9) He's the very “god of this system of things” an has blinded men's minds so that they do not see the truth.
Do you believe any of this?

Quote

So you say Christmas in which I sit my family down that morning and read from the first chapters of Mathew and Luke to my wife and children; that very Christmas is a pagan celebration. The very fact that if Christ had not come, Christ could not have died means nothing to witnesses it seems.

Now what you're doing and something people like to do is completely exaggerate to the point of lying what we believe in an effort to make us seem wrong. This isn't very nice. Christ's death (and birth which was necessary) means everything to us. But to take something so important and cover it with lies and false gods and twisted things is completely wrong in every way. It goes against everything Christ stood for.
Of course there's nothing wrong with reading Matthew and Luke. Do you do it on the day Christ was born or the day of the Roman Saturnalia or the Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (birthday of the Invincible Sun)? Hmmm. Makes you wonder? Are you surrounded with lights? They don't represent Christ. They've been a part of this celebration forever and they do represent the sun or sun god. In an effort to bring the dying sun back (with the shorter days of light) as we approach the end of december, they would cover their houses with lights. It's called “sympathetic magic.” Magic is condemned in the Bible. Does that matter. Anyway, they believed falsely that if they did something, that the sun would do the same. Magic. If they brought out light, the sun would come back. That is why the lights. The evergreen and the holly and mistltoe, are all plants that don't die during the winter. They were believed to have special…magic powers. They were believed to help. Superstitious ritual has become your traditions and you don't even care or know.
Nothing wrong with Matthew or Luke. But what does that have to do with the festival of Saturnalia, a time of gift giving and merryment? Sure, that day was given a new name: Christ's mass. But it doesn't change what it has always been. It's on the same date. It has the same customs. It's the same holiday, with a different name.
And if it's not pagan and it's Christmas, it's probably a lie or just false.
How did Jesus view such things?
Here's something else. Christmas isn't a 'Christian' holiday. The world celebrates it. Non-Chritians celebrate it. IT's a worldly holiday and is often associated with behavior that doesn't befit Christians. I know you aren't a part of this, but you take part in that pagan holiday covered in lies that the world celebrates it's own way.
And who's the ruler of the world?
Satan. Do you know how I know he is, besides the fact that the Bible says it?
It's because he was able to take Christ's birth and do what he did. Remarkable.
Tradition is hard.
We are so wrapped up in it, we can't see outside of it. It's hard to look at ourselves. Especially when the world is doing it. Who's the ruler of the world?

Quo te

So, because (by your argument) this holiday is pagan, let's stop it and remove it totally. Let's do away with any sort of day that has bearing from the Son of God Himself.

I'm sorry. Which scripture are we told to celebrate Christ's birth?
None.
But the Bible does have some things to say about the world and lies and paganism. So….

Quote

Because the pagans took what was real, the Birth of Christ and formed a pagan day around it

WRONG!
Wrong and just wrong. The pagans didn't take this day. Maybe I should find you some quotes. This day and the week leading up to it had been a pagan festival way before Christ.

300 YEARS AFTER CHRIST, because of the apostasy, Christians changed their minds and suddenly it was a good thing to celebrate Birthdays and in fact, why not put Christ's birthday on the birthday of the sun and try to cover up the paganism.
But you can't mix the table of Jehovah with the table of demons. You can't eat from both.
Some thought that it would be easier to make “Christians” if “Christians” celebrated a similar holiday on the day that the pagans were celebrating.

Quote

Let's let Satan have all the days for that matter.

You don't get it. This day was Satan's way before Christ's birth. The pagans celebrated it long before. It wasn't called Christmas, but they were doing similar things on that day.

Quote

If you do that David you have to do a whole lot more than that sir. Do you shop at Walmart? Do you know they are trying to help gay marriage rights? So with every penny you spend their you are contributing to their cause. Do you pay taxes? Some of those taxes pay for casino's and abortion clinics.

Wha'ts walmart? Of course we pay our taxes, kind of like Jesus said. Yes, we know that SOME of that money goes to bad places, but God has given the govenments a certain amount of authority and we are to obey them AND GOD. If the two come in conflict, obey God. We must be reasonable in these matters.
“Let your reasonableness become known to all men,” wrote the apostle Paul. (Philippians 4:5)
Where to draw the line is a good question. But when something is clearly pagan and packed with lies and we don't need to take part in it in any way….
I mean, the Bible itself tells us to obey the superior authorities and jesus said to give to Caesar what belongs to caesar and God what belongs to God. So, if we took your extreme example, we would have to break other laws to follow your line of reasoning.
We don't have to break any Bible principles or human laws by avoiding celebrating pagan holidays with “Christian” names.

Quote

Witnesses act like this world is going to hell in a hand basket so they shouldn't vote or have any influence in government. You all act like God is not using His army of believers like myself to make a difference in the world politically; politically to the point where my tiny little American vote can affect which candidate represents God's laws the best. If we believers don't vote David, then we mine as well sit back and let the world duke it out like you witnesses do because they're all going to hell. Because of my vote, one of the most wretched, vile, evil man in history as the likes of Hitler, is going to die for the evil he has committed.

I believe this deserves it's own discussion and won't discuss it or the scriptures that say you're wrong here, but didn't voting get you…

Quote

You aren't going to answer my questions huh? I am not surprised anymore by you David.

No, I will. I responded to more of your questions in that long post today and would have responded to more had you not posted this thread which I'm now responding to. I need to sleep soon.

Quote

If you run into a wall where someone on here makes a point you haven't investigated or you can't give a reason why they are wrong, all you do is run from it and start answering another post that you think you can answer.

I will answer your questions, but I'm not your personal answer machine or puppet. I have a life. I spend a lot of time on this forum and there are a lot of threads I'm more interested in than this one. I truly wish we could just stick on one subject for a week. Then I'd feel like I'm learning something.

Quote

Others of us out here are searching for more of God. We don't follow men's traditions or creeds.

Um… Christmas? Birthdays? Are these not traditions? You don't have to follow creeds to be wrong in some of your thinking.

Quote

A cult submits to it's founder. You are not a witness for Jehovah…you are a pon for James Taze Russell. Beware of false prophets.

So I take it our conversations are over and you can't answer my questions. That's fine.

I understand that you are frustrated by what I have said and by what you cannot say.

I don't mind discussing things with you, but can't do it like this. It's very easy to throw out words like “cult” without actually knowing what it means. Many do. And it's a sad tactic.

[Casey S Smith 29]

Ok David…sometimes you get mad or offended, sometimes I get mad or offended. I was thinking about this forum last night and some thoughts occured to me.
1)Why do I get so involved in this forum?
2)Why do I allow it to wound me all up?
3)Why does an opinion of a JW make a difference to me?
AMongst these there were many other thoughts and some conclusions I thought of. I have a passion for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (I do not wish to get into these titles for obvious reasons). The study or should I say persuit of God and seeking, searching for Him has been my desire for the past 10 years consistantly and throughout my life pretty much. I don't get the chance to teach people aside for those God sends my way one on one. If people do not get offended or even upset on this forum then I question if they are being honest with themselves. I am not content in “my” opinions of what Scriptures has revealed. I accepted years ago after God humbled me time and time again by crushing my presuppositions and arrogant, haughty attitude that He is BEYOND my comprehension at times and makes Himself aloof just to make me seek Him all the more. I am not trying to imply that everyone content with their theology and therefore not being offended are not honest, I just believe you have to allow God to upset “your” assumptions that are at times untenable. It bothers me when I don't have a reasonable answer to your questions that I thought were fullproof able to withstand criticism or explained away with a feasible reply.

Having said that let's move on. Your questions are:

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

1) Just because something was or was not done in the first century does not make it correct. There is this misconception that since something was done or not done by the early Church as quoted from the fathers that went before, bishops, elders, and so on, makes it applicable or not applicable for the present day. If you recall, the great heresy of Gnosticism was already making it's rounds around the regions and infultrating true believing followers of Christ like yeast spreading deceitfully within. You can find some Gnostic writings within the first couple of centuries from which you have current people being duped into believing the Roman Church was actually the decisive voice of what was cannon or what was not which as you probably know, the Da Vinci Code book and movie were based on. You can find the Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Thomas and others. Does that qualify them to meat the requirements of canonocity? Of course not. We also have the letter of St. Clement who was a disciple of Polycarp who was discipled by John (or Peter? I tend to forget which one). You also have the Gospel of Barnabas. In these letters we find great gems of truth and can get into the mindset of the early Church and it's services. However, these letters do not validate whether something is true or something is false. Man has always had some traditions. Some are good. Some are bad or unbiblical and some are neither good or bad but maybe noble. Take for instance the Rehabites who would not drink in honor of their great-grandfather who committed them to not allow strong drink or alcohol period to be consumed regardless of the reason. God commended the Rechabites and condemned the Israelites for not adhering to God's commandments and yet this small tribe adhered to their families tradition and hence even blessed this family. What I am getting at is there are traditions in the first century. Were any of us there at that century? Do we know the circumstances that some of the Church did not honor Christ's birthdate or people's birthdate? Let's assume you are right and this was seen as a descent from pagan. Can't the Church overcome pagan days and overturn them into days of celebration? All our days as you mentioned are named after pagan days as well as our months. Does that make it wrong to call these days and months by that name? If a pagan celebrated their day of birth and added mysticism to it, cannot a Christian and true follower of God use their day of birth in commemerating their years God has so graciously given to them? My great-grandfather who I took care of for over three years did just a month after he turned 94. His birthday in which my family and I took him to a restraunt was great because in all our eyes; not because it was some party, not because he was given a mexican sweet, but because God had given him more years than most people get a chance to see in this life. Their was no worship done. Their were no demons or “ghosts” involved. Their were no saunces performed. It was just a day that was remembere
d and we gave thanks to God for it.
You made a very inappropriate correlation to Hitler's glove; how you came up with this allegory is far beyond me. For the sake of replying to it though I will comment. You said that Hitler had a glove that he wore. This glove was passed down and somebody ended up finding it and let's say it was in good condition and was leather. Let's say this part of region this person lived in was quite cold. Let's say this person was broke, poor and could barely afford food. Let's say this person had to go to work with no gloves on and their hands were suffering tremendously for it (since yours was hypothetical and not very plausible I will have to likewise speak in such terms). You say it would be wrong for this person to wear the gloves because Hitler wore them. How do you figure? The gloves were a means to an end for Hitler who was of flesh and bone; evil flesh and bone but nontheless flesh and bone. This person who needed the gloves were of flesh and bone. You say even if he or she did not know they were Hitler's glove it would still be wrong. That makes no sense to me. Let's say this person found out it was Hitler's gloves (assuming this individual didn't sell them for an outstanding price to a museum and gave the proceeds to those whose families died under this monster of a man) and he still wore them to keep his hands warm. Why is that wrong sir? Again, makes no sense. Maybe you should use a different hypothetical situation because this one does not have any similarity to me.

Quote

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?

Just because we see a day of celebration portrayed in a negative light in these two instances do not justify in making the claim these celebrations in and of themselves are wrong. We see during weddings in Scripture a lot of people drinking strong drink and getting drunk. Does that mean the 7 day in length celebration in Jewish custom make weddings wrong? Just because somone used a day in which something great may have happened on that day, to use in an unbiblical manner does not make the feast itself wrong. Scripture NOWHERE condemns making one day more important than the next. Scripture NOWHERE makes mention of birthday parties wrong. You have to read INTO the Scripture (Eisogeting the text David)something that is not there. This postion you and witnesses hold to is simply not there. You make mention that Scripture condemns pagan worship. WHAT MAKES BIRTHDAY PARTIES WORSHIP? If a Satanist uses this day for evil (I don't know if they do or don't) and I make it a day for fun for my kids, I am not wrong or condemned at the expense of the the evil someone else does. Your logic again David is simply illogical. I don't know how else I can put it. You say that celebrating a day of the birth of Christ or a day of someone's birthday is not repenting. I say that being involved in both does not consitute a sin. If someone gets drunk at a “Christmas party” am I at fault for commenmorating the birth of Christ? I did not and was not and do not go to such “parties”. I once had a young lady when I worked for SBC invite me to her “Christmas party”. She was a lost pagan and I was aware of her lifestyle. I replied, “you want me to take a day in which my Lord and Saviour came to this earth to die for yours and my sins and celebrate it by participating in an act in which my Saviour and His Father both condemned? I do not think do.” She of course was highly offended and angry to the enth degree. I did not care. I stood up for what this day really stood for. Just because someone took this day in which Christ came and turned it into a day or month of joining in unbiblical and sinful activities does not make the day or celebration of the day wrong.

3)Well, I think I replied to much of this question in the above.

What “proof” do you have that the early Church did not celebrate the birth of Christ or someones day of birth? Show me this “proof” you have from someone who does not have axe to grind about Christmas or birthday's. I have noticed that witnesses in thier literature do not give biblographies, footnotes or endnotes of quotes that seem to justify their position. In fact, I have followed up with some of these quotes and found these quotes edited and taken out of context to make the defense in the literature seem to validate. Most are from peoples who were likeminded. There are few if any quotes from those who actually stand on neither side for or against. Why no page or paragraph numbers? Why does the Watchtower not submit to the copyright laws the rest of us have to? They will “sometimes” give the title of the reference but even at times will say someting to the affect of, “one source said (says)” and then make the comment that wa supposedly made. This I have found to be most frustrating.

Now, show me your “proof”.

[david]

Quote

You made a very inappropriate correlation to Hitler's glove;

You're right. It may have seemed like a contradiction when I explained that the candles in the cake aren't improper but just candles. And I realized that later. The point I was trying to get across was that some things are tainted. But I believe that the meat sold in the meat market that shouldn't be questioned is different than a glove worn by hitler. And I didn't mean to take it to the extreme or say that the person would have died of cold if they didn't wear those gloves. I was just trying to get you thinking about the fact that not all things come from good places. And that it can matter where a thing comes from. A nice shiny stereo in someones home. A stereo that was bought cheap because it was stolen. Does it matter where it came from? Birthdays and Christmas came from bad places. I was just trying, very poorly to make that real for you by comparing it to something you could see or feel. My illustration was bad. Sorry.

Quote

If you recall, the great heresy of Gnosticism was already making it's rounds around the regions and infultrating true believing followers of Christ

Yes, it was. It began even before the apostles had died. It was “already at work.” And when they died off, it exploded, like gangrene. It spread quickly. And eventually, it was decided that some things with pagan backgrounds that were shunned by the earliest Christians were ok. Was this a part of the apostasy? Or was it just things happening?
I think it was most certainly a part of the apostasy. You know, we have no record of the date of Jesus birth. That's because no one back then thought it should be noted. It wasn't until hundreds of years later that “Christians” began to celebrate it.

Quote

You can find the Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Thomas and others. Does that qualify them to meat the requirements of canonocity? Of course not. We also have the letter of St. Clement who was a disciple of Polycarp who was discipled by John (or Peter? I tend to forget which one). You also have the Gospel of Barnabas.

Imagine for a second that the earliest Christians shunned and avoided all these “gospels” or letters. If that was the case, would we want to consider them?

Quote

Do we know the circumstances that some of the Church did not honor Christ's birthdate or people's birthdate?

Yes. We do.

Quote

Again, makes no sense. Maybe you should use a different hypothetical situation because this one does not have any similarity to me.

Ok, I'm going to do the thing where I go the extreme to make a point. Sorry for this. Imagine that some satanic satan worshipping Satanists have a big party every year on….dec 25. Imagine that this celebration includes gift giving, an evergreen, lights, etc. Imagine that this celebration is so popular that it spreads. Anyway, this celebration is all about Satan and worshipping Satan and … Satan.
So, one day, a person who's not a very good Christion. Let's call him Pope Gregory the … I can't remember third? decides that in order to abolish the satanic practices, we're going to have a celebration on that day too. We'll call it God Day. And we'll say, even though it's not, that it's the date of God's birthday, I guess. Now, God doesn't like satan. That's clear. And all the people, if you look real close are still doing the same things that the satanic satan worshipping satan lovers were doing a thousand years ago. They're just too ignorant to understand why they bring a tree into their hose and cover it with light and other weird things like that. Did the good conquer the evil? If you add a cup full of clean refreshing water to a half glass of poison, are you going to drink it? What did God say about mixing these things? I'll let you find the scriptures. They do exist. If not, I'll find them for you. Do you remember when the israelites had the “festival to Jehovah” (that's what they called it) but really they were worshipping a golden calf? You can't Christianize idolatry or satanic practices by wrapping a bow on it or giving it a different name. And there is no mixing of truth with falsehood. Here are some scriptures you should consider: 2 cor 6:14,15; ex 3:25; deut 12:20,31; deut 5:9; ex 20:5; is 52:11; 1 cor 5:13; ex 32:4-10,31; 23:32,33; 1 sam 5:1-4; rev 19:11-16.

Quote

Just because we see a day of celebration portrayed in a negative light in these two instances do not justify in making the claim these celebrations in and of themselves are wrong. We see during weddings in Scripture a lot of people drinking strong drink and getting drunk. Does that mean the 7 day in length celebration in Jewish custom make weddings wrong?

We know getting married isn't wrong. We know getting drunk is wrong.
But what do we know about birthdays, their history, what the Bible says about them and what the Bible says about idolatry.

Quote

Scripture NOWHERE condemns making one day more important than the next. Scripture NOWHERE makes mention of birthday parties wrong.

But scripture does condemn idolatry. hmmm. I bet that's why the early Christians had nothing to do with birthdays and didn't even consider celebrating Jesus' birth until three hundred years later when they were no longer really what you'd call “christians.”

Quote

If a Satanist uses this day for evil (I don't know if they do or don't) and I make it a day for fun for my kids, I am not wrong or condemned at the expense of the the evil someone else does.

Of course not. But what if you adobt the satanist practices and make that day your day, his practices, your practices, his rituals, yours. Then, we have a different story.

Quote

I replied, “you want me to take a day in which my Lord and Saviour came to this earth to die for yours and my sins and celebrate it by participating in an act in which my Saviour and His Father both condemned? I do not think do.”

commendable.

Quote

What “proof” do you have that the early Church did not celebrate the birth of Christ or someones day of birth?

Check any encyclopedia.

Or, try the reverse. Try finding any authority that claims that the earliest Christians did celebrate birthdays.

Quote

In fact, I have followed up with some of these quotes and found these quotes edited and taken out of context to make the defense in the literature seem to validate.

Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. I've checked out all the quotes in the trinity broshure which many claim are taken out of context. They aren't.

And this one quote, which still baffles me, I went to the library to find. It bothered me that it didn't provide any information except that it was from The Encyclopedia Canadiana.

There, (Under Jehovah’s Witnesses), second paragraph:
“The work of Jehovah's Witnesses is the revival and re-establishment of the primitive Christianity practiced by Jesus and his disciples during the first and second centuries of our era. Their services are kept simple. They have no ornate buildings or clerical vestments, no divisions of members into clergy and laity. All are brothers, and every one baptized is under obligation to be a minister.”
(Toronto : Grolier of Canada, c1957-80. Vol 6)

While I agree with this, I still don't know why an encyclopedia would say it.

This quote more than all else bothered me. In our articles only the first sentence is quoted. I thought it had to be taken somehow out of context. It wasn't.

I really don't feel like showing you my proof. As you said, you believe that most everything the watchtower quotes are biased. Of course, when I did this research, as I said earlier, I checked 10 encyclopedias, all I could find easily. They all said the same thing. I'm not going to give you any of these quotes. They all say the exact same thing: The early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays because they considered them idolatrous.
Check for yourself. I've researched this so much I consider it a fact of history.

So here were my questions to you and others:

“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? WHERE THEY WRONG IN THEIR THINKING?

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
“

“DO YOU THINK THEIR (the early Christians) REASONS ARE UNIMPORTANT? WHERE THEY WRONG IN THEIR THINKING?”
I guess you do.

“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?”
I'm not sure you do.

“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?”
I guess the fun is more important of what God may or may not think to you.

Ok.

Quote

Ok David…sometimes you get mad or offended, sometimes I get mad or offended.

Yes we do.

Now that this is finished, this one topic, unless you'd like to say something else on it, ask me one thing. Just one. Go back to the questions I didn't answer in that long thread and find one or another question and ask me one thing. I'll reply. Then you reply on that same topic. Then I'll reply back on that same topic. Until one of us gets bored with the circles that will result. And you can pick a new topic. Pleae do not tell me everything you know every topic all at once.

dave

[david]

Recently, a few pages back, I quoted from several references that JW’s were put in concentration camps and the our form of worship was banned in Germany during that war.
I had stated that JW’s were the only group that could have left if they simply signed a sheet of paper renouncing their faith.
It had been suggested that there were other groups that faced similar things because of their faith. In a couple of the quotes I provided, it mentioned Catholic and Protestant clergy.
I don’t think that you can in any way compare the Catholics to JW’s in what they did during this great test.

First, whereas JW’s as a group were banned, outlawed and half of them were put in camps for refusing to take part in Hitlers efforts, the few Catholic priests who found themselves in the camps were the exception.

This is taken from the Awake magazine. The first paragraph is a complaint about the way we handled this matter. The second paragraph brings out my point.

“On behalf of the more than 50 million Catholics of the United States, the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights would like to express its astonishment and disappointment at the gross calumny against the Church in your issue “Religion in Politics—Is This God’s Will?” (April 22, 1987) The cover bears a photograph of a member of the Catholic hierarchy shaking hands with Hitler. The crude implication is that the Nazi movement, and its attempted genocide against the Jews and others, had the full cooperation and blessing of the Catholic Church. This false and irresponsible accusation appears explicitly on page 6, where it is alleged that Catholic clergymen offered the Nazi regime “support or at least coexistence.” As a matter of fact, the Vatican did attempt to negotiate peace with Hitler in the early days of Nazi Germany when it was still reasonable to hope that its excesses could be moderated. As the Nazi tyranny unfolded, the resistance of the Catholic Church increased. Not only do the editors of Awake! owe Catholics an apology for asserting otherwise; they owe it to their readership to set the record straight.
K. G. L., Director of Public Affairs,
United States
During his recent visit to Germany, Pope John Paul II tried to emphasize the opposition of the Catholic Church to Nazism. According to accounts, he listed many clerical and lay Catholics who opposed the Nazis. But according to “The New York Times” (May 4, 1987), this “effort has drawn criticism from some Catholics, however, who accuse the Pope of distorting the fact that few Catholic leaders actually resisted Nazi tyranny, beyond struggling to save church prerogatives.” Even Jesuit priest Rupert Mayer, whom the pope beatified for speaking out against the Nazis, was interned in the Benedictine abbey of Ettal under an agreement between Nazi leaders and the church hierarchy, for whom the Jesuit’s outspokenness had become an embarrassment, according to the “Times.” One Jesuit priest! Why did not the pope honor scores of Catholic bishops, archbishops, and cardinals, plus thousands of Catholic priests, for their opposition to the Nazis? Because the vast majority did not resist Nazism!—ED.”

–Awake 1987 8/8, p. 28

So when reading those quotes of a few pages back that have Catholic clergy in them, it should be noted that all German JW’s stood firm against Hitler’s regime. Certainly not any majority of German Catholics did. A small amount of the clergy did. And while this was happening, most clergy were blessing troops and saying: “heil hitler.”

Guenter Lewy writes in his book The Catholic Church and Nazi Germany: “Had German Catholicism from the start adhered to a policy of resolute opposition to the Nazi regime, world history might well have taken a different course. Even if this struggle had ultimately failed to defeat Hitler and prevent all of his many crimes, it would in this view have raised the moral prestige of the Church immeasurably. The human cost of such resistance would undeniably have been great, but these sacrifices would have been made for the greatest of all causes. With the home front unreliable, Hitler might not have dared going to war and literally millions of lives would have been saved. . . . When thousands of German anti-Nazis were tortured to death in Hitler’s concentration camps, when the Polish intelligentsia was slaughtered, when hundreds of thousands of Russians died as a result of being treated as Slavic Untermenschen [subhumans], and when 6,000,000 human beings were murdered for being ‘non-Aryan,’ Catholic Church officials in Germany bolstered the regime perpetrating these crimes. The Pope in Rome, the spiritual head and supreme moral teacher of the Roman Catholic Church, remained silent.”—Pages 320, 341.

He further writes:“When Jehovah’s Witnesses were suppressed in Bavaria on April 13 [1933] the [Catholic] Church even accepted the assignment given it by the Ministry of Education and Religion of reporting on any member of the sect still practicing the forbidden religion.”

The Catholic Church thus shares responsibility for consigning thousands of Witnesses to concentration camps; its hands are stained by the lifeblood of hundreds of Witnesses who were executed.

The clergy’s support of all of this is evidenced by the words of a Catholic priest, published in the newspaper The German of May 29, 1938. In part, he said:
“There is now one country on earth where the so-called . . . Bible Students [Jehovah’s Witnesses] are forbidden. That is Germany! . . . When Adolph Hitler came to power, and the German Catholic Episcopate repeated their request, Hitler said: ‘These so-called Earnest Bible Students [Jehovah’s Witnesses] are troublemakers; . . . I consider them quacks; I do not tolerate that the German Catholics shall be besmirched in such a manner by this American Judge Rutherford; I dissolve [Jehovah’s Witnesses] in Germany.’”

As Jesus said, his followers are “no part of the world.” They would not be involved in worldly pursuits or politics or … the world.
And they would have “love among themselves,” as the Jesus said of his disciples, so they certainly wouldn't be in a war and go to other countries and kill their fellow brothers.

david

[david]

For some 50 years, historians have been providing testimony regarding the integrity of the German witnesses of Jehovah during the Nazi regime. The book Mothers in the Fatherland, by historian Claudia Koonz, published in 1986, has this to say:
“The overwhelming majority of all Germans from non-Nazi backgrounds found ways of existing under a regime they despised. . . . At the other end of the statistical and ideological spectrum were the 20,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses who, practically to a person, unequivocally refused to render any form of obedience to the Nazi state. . . . The most cohesive group of resisters were sustained by religion. From the first, Jehovah’s Witnesses did not cooperate with any facet of the Nazi state. Even after the Gestapo destroyed their national headquarters in 1933 and banned the sect in 1935, they refused to do so much as say ‘Heil Hitler.’ About half (mostly men) of all Jehovah’s Witnesses were sent to concentration camps, a thousand of them were executed, and another thousand died between 1933 and 1945. . . . Catholics and Protestants heard their clergy urge them to cooperate with Hitler. If they resisted, they did so against orders from both church and state.”

[david]

While some Catholics did reject Nazism, Paul Johnson’s History of Christianity describes the norm:
“Both churches, in the main, gave massive support to the regime. . . . Of 17,000 Evangelical pastors, there were never more than fifty serving long terms [for not supporting the Nazi regime] at any one time. Of the Catholics, one bishop was expelled from his diocese, and another got a short term for currency offences.”
As to those who stuck to their principles, Johnson continues: “The bravest were the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who proclaimed their outright doctrinal opposition from the beginning and suffered accordingly. They refused any cooperation with the Nazi state.”

[Author]

Posts