Jump to content


Photo

Is The Mormon Church Christian?


  • Please log in to reply
130 replies to this topic

#21 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 10 April 2011 - 09:28 PM

Once again I agree with what you post. I have disagreed with "once save always saved" for as long as I can remember. This of course came part and parcel with Mormonism, since they believe one can stumble and fall. They draw lines based upon knowledge as well. But since leaving them I still think along the lines you have defined.

View Post


I got Mormons and JWs mixed up. I thought it was Mormons who did not believe in a literal Hell. I found this on the web about JWs:

They totally deny the existence of the traditional Christian view of Hell. Satan is regarded as having created the concept of Hellfire in order to turn people against God. They believe that hell is the "common grave of mankind" where people go when they die. They are not conscious there. Unbelievers simply cease to exist at death. Believers remain in death until the resurrection.


Good thing I looked it up. Would not want to start a debate on my misconception.

#22 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 10 April 2011 - 10:02 PM

Also, just because a particular doctrine has some things wrong does not mean all things are wrong. I cannot recall the exact verses, but I do remember the Bible saying that when we become knowledgeable enough in the word to self correct using the word. Then there is no excuse as to why we did not search it out and do so. Why? There are no perfect Christians, or denominations. Once the foundation of faith is laid, it is up to us to find more truth through God's word.

I would like to see more discussion on this if anyone wants to add something.  B)

Good to "see" you guys.
^_^  ^_^

View Post


The Christian this would apply to:

1) Well versed in the word so they cannot be led astray.
2) Have a firm foundation of faith. So that when correction comes it does not weaken it.
3) Be humble enough to be willing to accept correction using God's word. Because pride in our current doctrine will always get in the way of correction.
4) Be willing to "wait" on God when the truth is not clear.
5) Be willing to stay on course even though we will be attacked from all sides as we strive for that truth that seems almost unreachable.
6) To be corrected by God's word, one has to totally commit to it. Which means "No compromise". God is not going to reveal His truth to those whom willingly change it to fit what they believe.
7) You have to be willing to omit the phrase: I believe this about the Bible. If what you believe cannot be backed up through God's word, then it's not justified. And is merely opinions and words.
8) Be willing to stand the test. The test required for God to reveal His truth to us, through His word, is no compromise. God will send tests our way to see if we will compromise His word, and when we fail the test it won't continue until we admit to what we did. And strive to do better next time. Once we pass the test to the point that pleases God, then He will send truth and open our eyes to it.
9) Be willing to listen. Rejection of counsel from the Holy Spirit will make the Holy Spirit pull away from us. We may not always like what we hear, but listening is a basic rule to communication between God and man. Most Christians do not understand that when they won't listen, God becomes silent.
10) Also to understand that God's silence can also be a test. A test to see how we will apply what we have learned. God never leaves us, but He will test us. And every test is to strengthen our faith.

The main question is: How far would you be willing to go in your Christian life to search out some real truth? Because what's required is real commitment. And we will be tested to see if we have what it takes. I know, I have already gone through it. It was rough, but the rewards are great, and I'd do it over again. It took almost 4 years, but the wait was worth it. :)

#23 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 10 April 2011 - 10:18 PM

The first sign that you are in the wrong denomination, is when they tell you: You have to join our church, believe exactly as we do (to be saved), and everyone else who does not goes to hell.

What this does is:

1) Makes their church and their doctrine the means of salvation and not Christ.
2) Makes their church and their doctrine god.
3) Makes them have superseding authority to judge people for Hell and Heaven even before God judges them (everyone goes to hell unless they believe as we do and belong to our church). No where in God's word does God ever give the church such authority over men. There is no: Judgment throne of the church.

Basically, a doctrine that says: You are going to Hell of Heaven because......

And it's not based on what the Bible says will send you there. That's a false doctrine. And the person who preaches it is taking on a authoritative power that is not appointed to them to try and determine who goes to Heaven or Hell that is not based on salvation.

#24 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 11 April 2011 - 07:30 AM

I fail to see how this (quoted post below) has anything at all to do with the post that Geode and I agreed to. In my mind it does not. You just like to drill your point on hell into the ground because you know I disagree.

I got Mormons and JWs mixed up. I thought it was Mormons who did not believe in a literal Hell. I found this on the web about JWs:
Good thing I looked it up. Would not want to start a debate on my misconception.

View Post

In addition, this is incorrect. There will be a resurrection of both the "righteous and the unrighteous" or "all those in memorial tombs". JWs official website answers the question: "Are JWs the only ones who will be saved" the official answer is that there will be others and Christ Jesus is our judge.

#25 Geode

Geode

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 60
  • Mormon
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Bangkok, Thailand

Posted 11 April 2011 - 06:26 PM

5) Jesus’ death did not pay for everyone’s sins
6) You cannot be saved without accepting Joseph Smith as a true prophet of God (Mormons throughout history have claimed the Christian body was the church of Satan, but they have toned this down in recent years in their attempt to appear more mainline Christian)

I believe these two greatly transgress the doctrine of Christ, because our salvation is exclusively in the blood of redemption (paying for sin and release from the debt of sin) that Christ afforded to all who believe.

No. 5 takes away from Christ's sacrifice--it paid for all sin. That is why it is unforgivable to reject Christ, and the salvation He affords--"He that believes and is baptized shall be saved. He that believes not shall be condemned" (Mark the last chapter). No. 4 adds to salvation, that you must believe not only on Christ but on the writings of Joseph Smith.


But this is not what Mormons believe. They do teach that the sacrifice of Christ paid for everyone's sins. They do not believe or teach that accepting Joseph Smith as a true prophet of God is necesssary for one to be saved. They also have not taught throughout their history that other Christians are the church of Satan quite the way that is being implied. There are a handful of comments that are negative towards other Christian sects from Brigham Young a century and a half ago, the account given by Joseph Smith that he was not to join any existing sect (although there is evidence he attending presbyterian services after supposedly being told that by God), and there was the negative inclusion of a protestant minister in their most basic temple ceremony who is duped by Satan to hold to wrong concepts and lead people astray, but that was removed in 1990. You could make a case from that in teh past, but nothing in the past 30 years qualifies so it is not a matter of being "toned down" at present, it is absent. True, no Mormon should ever have implied this in my opinion, but it remains an incorrect statement that such is still a position of the Mormon church.

The book of Mormon has an undertitle "Another Testament of Jesus Christ." The book of Hebrews clearly teaches that the shedding of blood must come with the installation of a covenant, so who's blood was shed for another testament??


The Mormons would say that this would be Christ. They basically say that the Book of Mormon contains the same gospel and the same covenent and would consider the rest of your discussion irrelevent for that reason.

#26 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 11 April 2011 - 08:17 PM

I fail to see how this (quoted post below) has anything at all to do with the post that Geode and I agreed to. In my mind it does not. You just like to drill your point on hell into the ground because you know I disagree. In addition, this is incorrect. There will be a resurrection of both the "righteous and the unrighteous" or "all those in memorial tombs". JWs official website answers the question: "Are JWs the only ones who will be saved" the official answer is that there will be others and Christ Jesus is our judge.

View Post


No, actually I was about to make a comment about Mormons not believing in Hell because of what Geode said here:

Another interesting thing is that it comes in a thread about Mormons. What you have set down here is basically the same as what Mormons believe on this subject as I remember their teachings.


I thought the comment was strange if Mormons don't believe in Hell. But it had been a long time since I had discussed Mormon or JW beliefs I thought I'd better check it out before I say that Mormons don't believe in Hell. So I did a search. I found that they do. So I got curious as to who it was that does not. So I searched JW beliefs on this and what I posted here:

They totally deny the existence of the traditional Christian view of Hell. Satan is regarded as having created the concept of Hellfire in order to turn people against God. They believe that hell is the "common grave of mankind" where people go when they die. They are not conscious there. Unbelievers simply cease to exist at death. Believers remain in death until the resurrection.


Was what I found on the internet about this. I was correcting myself on what I thought about the Mormons, it had nothing to do with what you believe. In fact I did not know the extent of what was believed about Hell and death by JWs until I read that. Go back and read what I said, I was correcting myself because I thought Mormons believed there was no Hell.

I got Mormons and JWs mixed up. I thought it was Mormons who did not believe in a literal Hell. I found this on the web about JWs:...

Good thing I looked it up. Would not want to start a debate on my misconception.



#27 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 11 April 2011 - 08:25 PM

Thanks for attempting to clear this up. I really had no idea what you were talking about, but I am thinking that our misunderstanding must be coming from this post, the one that Geode agreed to. His agreement to this post is what started you talking about hell. Actually, Ikester, I agreed to this post as well. I am guessing that you think that if someone agrees with the bolded phrase, then they must believe in a literal hell?

Actually the judgment is based on three things:

1) Our ability to understand or comprehend truth of God's word.
2) Our accessibility to it.
3) Our ability to allow ourselves to be corrected by God's word.

#1 covers those who maybe mentally challenged for one reason or another.
#2 covers those who may not have access to a Bible.
#3 Is more about those who think they already know truth, and therefore will refuse correction concerning God's word. Their denominational beliefs, their opinions, and pride can never allow them to become humble enough to ever admit they were wrong.

James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

You see it's the knowledge to do right, and the choice, while knowing right from wrong, that makes it a sin. If you did not truly know, how can you truly be condemned for all eternity for what you did not know of? In other words, the less you know about doing good the more leeway there will be. But, there won't be an excuse for willing ignorance either.

#1 If they cannot comprehend what doing good is, how can they be held responsible?
# 2 If they have no accessibility to learn right from wrong, how can they know or be held accountable?
#3 And if they have all these things (comprehension and accessibility) and reject them. Then there is no excuse.

You see the judgment is not going to be exactly the same for everyone. If it was, hardly anyone would make it into Heaven. Our judgment will be adjusted to our knowledge and our choices after receiving that knowledge (when we found out it was sin but did it anyway).

Example: Let's say a person is new in Christ (1 year saved). They end up in front of judgment because they died. Standing next to them is someone who has been saved for 30 years and has a lot of knowledge about good and evil. Yet the new in Christ does not. Would it be fair to judge them both by the same standard as the one with more knowledge will be judged for? Of course not. It would be like saying an young child should be held responsible like an adult would be for taking what was not theirs.

Even God's word recognizes those who are not as knowledgeable in the word:

1cor 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

View Post



#28 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 11 April 2011 - 08:34 PM

In fact I did not know the extent of what was believed about Hell and death by JWs until I read that.

View Post

Just a quick note. DH and I were looking up some information on JW beliefs because we were in disagreement on something. DH found a website with stories from people who left the JWs and went elsewhere. Some of the beginning had me nodding in agreement, but soon misinformation was abundant (and supposedly written by someone who was a Witness for years ^_^ ). I would not trust what any source other than the official website (watchtower.org) has to say.

#29 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 12 April 2011 - 01:35 PM

I was expecting another reply, but since one is not forthcoming, I wanted to spell it out. Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in a literal place for immortal souls to be tortured for all eternity. Jehovah's Witnesses do believe in eternal condemnation, which is clearly spelled out in the scriptures.

#30 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 12 April 2011 - 01:47 PM

I was expecting another reply, but since one is not forthcoming, I wanted to spell it out. Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in a literal place for immortal souls to be tortured for all eternity. Jehovah's Witnesses do believe in eternal condemnation, which is clearly spelled out in the scriptures.

View Post


Do JWs have their own Bible?

#31 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 12 April 2011 - 05:08 PM

Do JWs have their own Bible?

View Post

No.

#32 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 12 April 2011 - 09:12 PM

No.

View Post


What version do they use?

#33 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 12 April 2011 - 09:51 PM

What version do they use?

View Post

In 1884 Jehovah’s Witnesses formed a corporation for carrying on their Bible-publishing work, the corporation being now known as the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. At first Bibles were purchased from other Bible societies for redistribution by these Witnesses. The King James Version of 1611 in English was used as their basic version for Bible study.

In December 1926, The Emphatic Diaglott became the first Bible version to be printed on the Society’s own presses at Brooklyn, New York. Jehovah's Witnesses have obtained printing rights, published and/or distributed: The King James Version, The Emphatic Diaglott, Rotherham and Holman Bibles, American Standard Version, The Bible in Living English, and The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures which was translated by Jehovah's Witnesses.

I often use the American Standard Version and the New Jerusalem Bible. The library at my congregation has about 7 different versions including a Greek Interlinear and The King James. My good friend who is a Witness reads the Bible in a different translation every year. She loaned me her Living Bible which I am reading now. If I have a question of something, I can easily find the original Hebrew and Greek words by using the index in my New World Translation, so I do find that it is valuable, though the wording is so literal that I don't prefer it for my reading.

This is from one of our books...

Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations in are from the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, 1984 edition (NW). Explanations of the abbreviations used to designate other translations of the Bible are provided below:

AS    - American Standard Version (1901; as printed in 1944), American Revision Committee.

AT    - The Bible—An American Translation (1935), J. M. Powis Smith and Edgar J. Goodspeed.

By    - The Bible in Living English (published in 1972), Steven T. Byington.

CBW   - The New Testament—A Translation in the Language of the People (1937; as printed in 1950), Charles B. Williams.

CC    - The New Testament (1941; as printed in 1947), Confraternity of Christian Doctrine Revision.

CKW   - The New Testament—A New Translation in Plain English (1963), Charles K. Williams.

Da    - The ‘Holy Scriptures’ (1882; as printed in 1949), J. N. Darby.

Dy    - Catholic Challoner-Douay Version (1750; as printed in 1941).

ED    - The Emphatic Diaglott (1864; as printed in 1942), Benjamin Wilson.

Int   - The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures (1969).

JB    - The Jerusalem Bible (1966), Alexander Jones, general editor.

JP    - The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text (1917), Jewish Publication Society of America.

KJ    - King James Version (1611; as printed in 1942).

Kx    - The Holy Bible (1954; as printed in 1956), Ronald A. Knox.

LEF   - The Christian’s Bible—New Testament (1928), George N. LeFevre.

LXX   - Greek Septuagint Version.

Mo    - A New Translation of the Bible (1934), James Moffatt.

NAB   - The New American Bible, Saint Joseph Edition (1970).

NE    - The New English Bible (1970).

NTIV  - The New Testament in an Improved Version (1808), published in London.

Ro    - The Emphasised Bible (1897), Joseph B. Rotherham.

RS    - Revised Standard Version, Second Edition (1971).

Sd    - The Authentic New Testament (1958), Hugh J. Schonfield.

SE    - The Simple English Bible—New Testament, American Edition (1981).

TC    - The Twentieth Century New Testament, Revised Edition (1904).

TEV   - Good News Bible—Today’s English Version (1976).

We    - The New Testament in Modern Speech (1929; as printed in 1944), Richard F. Weymouth.

Yg    - The Holy Bible, Revised Edition (1887), Robert Young.

The Witnesses felt that the New World Translation was needed to 1. restore the divine name to the Scriptures 2. render the scriptures in the language of the common man 3. bring out as much of the true sense of the original Hebrew and Greek text as the English language is capable of expressing. Generally you can find one of these three attributes in other translations, but not all three in one translation. Hebrew and Greek commentator Alexander Thomson had to say in his review on the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures: “The version aims to keep to one English meaning for each major Greek word, and to be as literal as possible."

#34 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 14 April 2011 - 07:42 PM

Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in a literal place for immortal souls to be tortured for all eternity. Jehovah's Witnesses do believe in eternal condemnation, which is clearly spelled out in the scriptures.

View Post

Why? Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. Jesus said that. Also he taught that at the final judgment:

41“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45“He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”


Why would you deny this? God doesn't honor denominations or their teaching. He only honors the word of His Son, and those who accept it by faith.

#35 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 14 April 2011 - 08:10 PM

Why?  Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. Jesus said that.  Also he taught that at the final judgment:
Why would you deny this?

I will be brief and include links, since I have been through this debate before, and it is OT.

In Mark 9:43-48 Christ quite evidently refers to the same judgment fires as those described in Isaiah 66:24, where we read:  “They [the righteous] shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses [“dead bodies,” A.R.V.] of the men that have transgressed against me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched.”  We are told in so many words that the agencies of “work” and “fire” are working, not upon disembodied spirits, but upon bodies, dead bodies.

http://www.helltruth.com/q-a/their-worm-dieth-not.aspx

I think that the scripture in Revelation that says, “They will be tormented day and night forever.” (14:9-11) is what I used to think pointed to hell more than any other. What is interesting though, is that the worshipers of the wild beast are not always pictured as burned up or tormented. Revelation 19:21 shows the execution, being left unburied and being consumed by the birds. Rather than being buried as if meriting resurrection, their carcasses are left on the ground and carrion birds are to eat them. Therefore the images used by Christ Jesus are to show a terrible fate and a complete destruction, not a literal burning of a disembodied soul.

http://www.evolution...163

God doesn't honor denominations or their teaching. He only honors the word of His Son, and those who accept it by faith.

Exactly. Hellfire is a doctrine based on yet another unscriptural doctrine, the immortal soul. http://www.evolution...?showtopic=4078 http://www.msnbc.msn...s/us_news-life/

#36 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 14 April 2011 - 10:28 PM

In 1884 Jehovah’s Witnesses formed a corporation for carrying on their Bible-publishing work, the corporation being now known as the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. At first Bibles were purchased from other Bible societies for redistribution by these Witnesses. The King James Version of 1611 in English was used as their basic version for Bible study.

In December 1926, The Emphatic Diaglott became the first Bible version to be printed on the Society’s own presses at Brooklyn, New York. Jehovah's Witnesses have obtained printing rights, published and/or distributed: The King James Version, The Emphatic Diaglott, Rotherham and Holman Bibles, American Standard Version, The Bible in Living English, and The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures which was translated by Jehovah's Witnesses.

I often use the American Standard Version and the New Jerusalem Bible. The library at my congregation has about 7 different versions including a Greek Interlinear and The King James. My good friend who is a Witness reads the Bible in a different translation every year. She loaned me her Living Bible which I am reading now. If I have a question of something, I can easily find the original Hebrew and Greek words by using the index in my New World Translation, so I do find that it is valuable, though the wording is so literal that I don't prefer it for my reading.

This is from one of our books... The Witnesses felt that the New World Translation was needed to 1. restore the divine name to the Scriptures 2. render the scriptures in the language of the common man 3. bring out as much of the true sense of the original Hebrew and Greek text as the English language is capable of expressing. Generally you can find one of these three attributes in other translations, but not all three in one translation. Hebrew and Greek commentator Alexander Thomson had to say in his review on the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures: “The version aims to keep to one English meaning for each major Greek word, and to be as literal as possible."

View Post


Learn something new everyday.

#37 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 15 April 2011 - 02:11 AM

Learn something new everyday.

View Post

:P I thought that answer was unexpected.

Thank you for your kind handling of our misunderstanding, friend. It means a lot.

JWs and Mormons both go from door to door in preaching at times. Neither accept the Trinity doctrine as taught by other denominations... so many believe that they are similar. I have found after looking into the LDS beliefs that our beliefs are very very different. Our explanation of the Trinity is completely different, for example. Our hope of a reward is different. JWs also do not claim that anyone has been divinely inspired since John's writings.

As for JW beliefs that are different from the majority of mainstream Christianity (especially concerning the Trinity) I have found that the differences are emphasized more than the similarities (by JWs and not)... and that is regretful.

#38 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 16 April 2011 - 04:54 AM

I will be brief and include links, since I have been through this debate before, and it is OT.
http://www.helltruth...-dieth-not.aspx

I think that the scripture in Revelation that says, “They will be tormented day and night forever.” (14:9-11) is what I used to think pointed to hell more than any other. What is interesting though, is that the worshipers of the wild beast are not always pictured as burned up or tormented. Revelation 19:21 shows the execution, being left unburied and being consumed by the birds. Rather than being buried as if meriting resurrection, their carcasses are left on the ground and carrion birds are to eat them. Therefore the images used by Christ Jesus are to show a terrible fate and a complete destruction, not a literal burning of a disembodied soul.

http://www.evolution...163
Exactly. Hellfire is a doctrine based on yet another unscriptural doctrine, the immortal soul. http://www.evolution...?showtopic=4078 http://www.msnbc.msn...s/us_news-life/

View Post

Mama,
You didn't deal with the direct word of Christ (Matthew 25:41) about the Son of Man sitting on the judgement, and sending the unrighteous away into eternal fire "prepared for the devil and his angels." And in Revelation there are correlating verses (19:10; 20:10) that show Satan, the antichrist, and the false prophet being thrown into the "lake of fire." You remrked yourself that the smoke of their torment ascends forever.

Concerning the Isaiah passage you used to challenge Matthew 25:41. There are many examples of types and shadows of later revealed things in OT prophecies. Sometimes the Lord used earthly scenes or events in the prophecies, and then change to a spiritual or future event in the same passage. That's why there was controversy about Christ. The Pharisees and Saducess interpreted the prophecies a certain way, but they were wrong. I Peter 1:10, 11 says the prophets themselves did not fully understand the revelation of the new covenant that would come later, and searched to see what their prophecies meant.

Do you want to use an OT prophecy which contains type and shadow to explain away a direct statement of Christ? One is concealed truth, the latter is revealed truth--just like the manner of the OT and the NT is.

You say that hell is an unscriptual doctrine. I find this quite amazing, since the word "hell" appears over 50 times in the KJV, and in the OT it is always placed--as in "beneath" or "below." It sometimes speaks of fire or burning. This aligns with the words of Christ.

Deuteronomy 32:22
22For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.

Psalms 86:13
For great is thy mercy toward me: and thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest hell.

Psalm 55:15
Let death seize upon them, and let them go down quick into hell: for wickedness is in their dwellings, and among them.

Proverbs 15:24
The way of life is above to the wise, that he may depart from hell beneath.


New Testament aligns--remember that Revelation was given to John by Jesus himself.

Revelation 19:20
And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone



As for the immortal soul. If a man wants to challenge the scripture, that's up to him. I will choose God's word.


Revelation 20:10
And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.


It is obvious the beast and the false prophet were men--flesh and blood, thrown "alive" into the lake of fire according to Revelation 19:20. But now in Rev. 20:10 Satan is thrown in also, where "they" shall be tormented day and night forever and ever. If the soul were not immortal, the beast and the false prophet would not be in hell with Satan forever!

That's why the psalmist rejoiced when he said in Psalm 16:10

Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; nor wilt then give thy holy one to see corruption.

If the soul dies, how could his soul be left in hell (I realize some translations say Sheol, or the grave, but the point is the same)?

#39 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 16 April 2011 - 06:17 AM

In December 1926, The Emphatic Diaglott became the first Bible version to be printed on the Society’s own presses at Brooklyn, New York. Jehovah's Witnesses have obtained printing rights, published and/or distributed: The King James Version, The Emphatic Diaglott, Rotherham and Holman Bibles, American Standard Version, The Bible in Living English, and The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures which was translated by Jehovah's Witnesses.

View Post

Mama,
What do you mean? Are you saying the 1611 authorized version of the KJV was translated by Jehovah's Witnesses? This would not be correct.

Also, I believe this your quote or Joshua Sparks from another thread. I read it from one of the above links you gave in defense of your belief that the soul is not immortal.

Now we know Jesus was not immortal until after His death, Burial and resurrection or else he could not have died, but He did and He through His death and Resurrection can grant to us eternal life also.( John 17:1-3)


Nothing could be further from the truth, mama. Jesus Christ is the pre-existant Word of God, and was with God in the beginning (John 1:1,14). It is obvious the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us. The Word was with God in the beginning.

John 17:5
And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.


Again, a direct word of Christ, which these teachers seem to have little regard for. A Christian believes the word of Christ over the words of man. If Christ says he was with God in the beginning, it is obvious He was NEVER mortal. What a diabolical leaven this is!

John 8:58
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM.


These are the same words, I AM, that God used on the mount with Moses. It's obvious Jesus is eternal.

#40 MamaElephant

MamaElephant

    former JW

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,564 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Bible, Home-schooling, Education, Fitness, Young Earth Science, Evolution, Natural Medicine, Board Games, Video Games, Study of cult mind control and Counseling for those coming out of cult mind control.
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I am His! 1/29/12

Posted 16 April 2011 - 06:59 AM

Mama,
What do you mean?  Are you saying the 1611 authorized version of the KJV was translated by Jehovah's Witnesses?  This would not be correct.

No. I said that the New World Translation was translated by Jehovah's Witnesses.


Revelation 19:21 shows the execution of the very same people that are earlier said to be tormented day and night forever. These very same people are left unburied and consumed by the birds. The same comparison can be made of Sodom and Gomorrah, they are said to burn forever in one scripture and they are said to be destroyed in another (both in the NT).

Acts 17:2,3 shows man reasoning on the scriptures. Not every doctrine that you disagree with is "man's reasoning" as opposed to what the scriptures have to say. That is a rather conceited view.

I don't have time to look up any more information at the moment, and I don't intend to debate this ad nauseum, but thought I would get back to you. I think that part of the problem is that you and I have a different meaning for immortal, but you have a point about Jesus. He was already the only begotten of God, different than any other being, which were all created by Jesus. I will have to double check what Br. Sparks said there.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users