How can you defeat a belief based on the Bible? The Bible doesn't even say to use it like that. Devoid of tradition, the Biblical canon isn't clear. JW split from the teachings of Jesus and his Apostles but so did Protestants, so how do you expect to outreason them using their own logic?

>>18685621
Very simply. The grant the tradition that establishes the biblical canon, affirming that all the works in the canon are divinely inspired, but reject other traditions like trinity, transubstantiation, mary veneration, etc. as the folly of man. I'm asking for biblical proofs that contradict their teachings.

>>18685603
All of their beliefs are cited. But the verses can mean many things, but JW's are confident in just one interpretation.

The famous one is "do not eat animal blood" gets transformed into "no blood donation"
The Pharaoh and Herod's Birthday's being mention is transformed into "Birthdays are pagan and forbidden"
Jesus will return with "an Archangels voice" is turned into "Jesus is Michael the Archangel"

if you actually want to "deboonk" Jehovahs you can just pull up the actual verses on blood donation, birthdays, and Archangel on their very own website articles and see for yourself how they interpret verses.

JW kinda make stuff up and hide old or previous interpretations as new light. Just take a look at their doctrinal changes.

https://jwfacts.com/watchtower/changed-watchtower-teachings.php

pretty much the only thing that JW get right is that the trinity and the "soul" going to heaven when we die are false doctrines.

>>18685603
>Please no trinity
hahahahaha, because the trinity is not a defensible doctrine and JW will run circles around you and destroy you if you challenge them on it

Just ask him about 1874, 1914, 1915, 1925, 1975, etc.

Jesus says only the Father knows the date and time, oh but apparently the Governing Body knows too.

>>18685636
They are picking and choosing traditions then. If only there were direct descendants of Christians and the apostles to tell us what is correct... Also we have the writings of the church fathers.

>>18685603
I'm a JW, what do you want to know?

>>18685674
We follow the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law

>>18685728
Interpretations of prophecies are subject to change depending on whether new information moves us to examine them under a new light

I don’t see the problem

>>18685941
Never have we said anything about the end coming at these dates.

I challenge you to quote any publication saying that the end would come at these dates. You cannot

>>18685741
Why are our other doctrines wrong?

>>18686082
Where does it say the Church Fathers have perfectly and indefinitely preserved the teachings of Christ?

File: bc745f31e.png (272 KB, 822x1857)

272 KB PNG

>>18685603
The Holy Trinity is mentioned numerous times in the Bible actually. In Genesis 1:26 God says, "Let us make man in our image." Perhaps the two most famous verses are John 10:30 and 1 John 5:7, which both teach us about God's single essence and triune nature. John 10:30 is spoken by Jesus: "I and my Father are one." Other Bible quotes speak to Christ's eternal existence and divinity.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
- John 1:1

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

"And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."
- John 17:5

"And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."
- Matthew 28:18-20

"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."
- Colossians 2:9

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"
- Philippians 2:5-6

"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."
- Hebrews 1:8

"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."
- 1 Timothy 3:16

"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
- John 1:14

"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
- 1 John 5:7 (KJV)

>John 1:1
There you go anon. JW demolished with one simple Word

>>18685603
>I haven't actually managed to defeat a single one of their beliefs based on the Bible.
Based on the bible they predicted Armageddon 8 times and were wrong.

>>18686291
None of these say God is one substance shared by three co-equal and co-eternal persons

Try again!

>>18686295
John 1:1 speaks of two distinct deities, it doesn’t say the Word was the same God it was with.

Try again!

>>18686297
I challenge you to quote any publication saying that the end would come at a specific dates. You cannot

File: kjv_10.jpg (541 KB, 1600x1200)

541 KB JPG

>>18685621
>How can you defeat a belief based on the Bible?
A belief that is unbiblical is defeated by the truth of God's word as we find it in scripture.

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
- 2 Timothy 2:15

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."
- Romans 10:17

"And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God."
- Revelation 19:9

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
- 2 Timothy 3:16-17

"If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself."
- 1 Timothy 6:3-5

>>18686302
>A belief that is unbiblical is defeated by the truth of God's word as we find it in scripture

Correct! That is why JWs are the true folllwers of Christ

>>18686300
>and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
Who is the Word that became flesh? Ask your "elders" and watch them kvetch worse than rabbis

>>18686306
It’s Jesus, but you are missing my point. It doesn’t say the Word is the same God it was with

>>18686139
>Why are our other doctrines wrong?

Haven't looked into it all, I made an intellectually indefensible statement for that reason, sorry about that.. Let me just make a few random statements I believe to be true after reading some books on Christology, Biblical Unitarianism etc.

>there is only one God, the Father, and Jesus is his messenger, his agent endowed with the ability to perform miracles, read minds, and other super human powers are given to him through the Father, without who he can't do anything
>Jesus was foreknown but not pre existent, therefore he had to grow in wisdom, learn, and be reprimanded by Mary and Joseph as a child
>Jesus was a human being not God, that's why he grew tired, became hungry, was tempted, got angry, experienced disappointment etc
>when we die we lay down and rot until the Parousia when the righteous will be resurrected into the Life of the Coming Age, the unrighteous will not be resurrected (correct Jewish interpretation of Daniel 12:2). Nobody is going to heaven. And nobody is there now except for God, Jesus and the heavenly court.
>when you die it's light out. No soul beaming off to the pearly gates. Lay down and rot until the Parousia, in fact for most lay down and rot forever as they will not be raised
>Jesus will return to rule the world as the anointed (messiah) king of Israel with an iron scepter
>his disciples will be given positions in government
>as such the kingdom is coming

Amen

>>18686313
We JWs believe Jesus was pre-existent before God transferred his life into Mary’s womb

>>18686308
>In the beginning
Are you pretending to be retarded? Are you proud of your retarded cultish heresy and being led by the nose like cattle? It's not easy admitting your entire worldview was built upon lies and if lies are more comforting to you then by all means carry on. But don't ask me to believe your bullshit when I can read for myself and know that you are lying. That's why I find your ilk annoying. You want others to believe your lies

>>18686291
You are so basic and all of your talking points are a joke and easily refuted.

>>18686321
Then you're wrong bigtime. I briefly gave some evidence as to why in the post you quoted.

>>18686324
>In the beginning

Yes, Jesus is the firstborn of Jehovah. Thus he existed in the beginning

Anything else?

>>18686300
>I challenge you to quote any publication saying that the end would come at a specific dates. You cannot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfulfilled_Watch_Tower_Society_predictions
Just look at the sources list. I actually found most of the listed publications online.

>>18686327
You just made the claim that Jesus was not pre-existent. You did not give evidence to support that claim at all

>>18686332
None of these quotes give a specific date for Armaggedon

I challenge you once again to post a quote here right now

Try again!

>>18686333
>Jesus was foreknown but not pre existent, therefore he had to grow in wisdom, learn, and be reprimanded by Mary and Joseph as a child

Why would a pre existent divine creature need all that?

>>18686329
>a god
There's your problem. Keep playing stupid though, that's all you're good for

>>18686339
Hebrews 4:15:

“For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.”

File: 1643097528154.jpg (29 KB, 640x480)

29 KB JPG

>>18686313
>>when we die we lay down and rot until the Parousia when the righteous will be resurrected into the Life of the Coming Age, the unrighteous will not be resurrected
That goes directly against what Christ said in John 5.

"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."
(John 5:28-29)

It also goes against numerous other prophecies besides Daniel 12:2 itself.

>Nobody is going to heaven. And nobody is there now except for God, Jesus and the heavenly court.
Directly contradicts Christ's statement in the Gospels.

"And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise."
- Luke 23:42-43

"We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord."
- 2 Corinthians 5:8

>Lay down and rot until the Parousia, in fact for most lay down and rot forever as they will not be raised
That doesn't fit the Old Testament either. For example:

"Like sheep they are laid in the grave; death shall feed on them; and the upright shall have dominion over them in the morning; and their beauty shall consume in the grave from their dwelling.
But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah."
- Psalm 49:14-15

"For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption."
- Psalm 16:10

>there is only one God, the Father, and Jesus is his messenger,
Jesus is called God in numerous places, for example John 1:1. For more see >>18686291

Bonus verse:

"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."
- Acts 20:28

>>18686341
Every single Greek scholar agrees theos in the second clause is qualitative.

Hence why it is translated a god or divine in accurate translations.

>>18686342
That doesn't anwer the question

File: 741B.jpg (13 KB, 424x561)

13 KB JPG

>>18686339
Hypostatic union. He has a divine and a human nature, and when speaking of His growth in wisdom/stature in Luke 2, this refers specifically to His human nature. What you've pointed out is not a contradiction to the doctrine of the divine Trinity because there is one Person (our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ) with two distinct natures.

>>18686345
It is so that Jesus can sympathize with our weakness, as our high priest. To intercede in our behalf with God

>>18686336
“And now we come nearer to the time when our change seems due (we know not the day or hour, but expect it during 1881, possibly near the autumn when the parallels show the favor to Zion complete and due to end, the door the marriage shut and high calling to be the bride of Christ, to cease) and light on the subject is becoming clearer…” (Watchtower, February, 1881, p. 5)

Do I have to dig out every single quote?

>>18686346
>Hypostatic union

Not in the Bible

>>18686343
>Trinitarian quoting from John

Very predictable, you people are hopeless. John is written for Greek audiences, as such intentionally appeals to pagan beliefs

>>18686344
You're wrong and you have completely misrepresented what someone else might have said. Moreover, you are not addressing the crux of the argument but sniveling like a rat. Before I continue further, I must ask you to denounce the satanic talmud, both babylonian and jerusalem versions.

>>18686351
>seems due
>we expect it
>possibly

It’s not dogmatic or definitive, it’s saying it’s a possibility.

Try again!

>>18686352
>I and the Father are One
Confirms Divinity, one half of the hypostatic binome
>born of a woman
Confirms humanity, second half of the hypostatic binome
Checkmate heretic

>>18686355
Lol, nice goal post shifting

>>18686348
No you're wrong but that's why you're a JW.

>>18686304
Why did you guys feel the need to alter the Bible to try and amend it to suit your theology?

>>18686300
>>18686308
Yeah you guys changed the Bible adding "Jehovah" hundreds of times into the NT where the term "YHWH" isn't found in the Greek. Your anonymous committee behind the "New World translation" also changed the beginning of John so it reads "the Word was *a* god" thinking polytheism to be preferable to the trinity I guess?

What was that bit about not "adding or removing" from scripture? Because you guys did just that.

>>18686336
>>18686355
Here we see the mindset of a true believer in the cult. Confronted with obvious evidence, he will still defend Watchtower. He can't allow himself to even rationally engage the argument, because to do so would mean opening himself up to losing his entire social circle to shunning.

>>18686339
Do all JWs skip most of NT when "reading the Bible" or is it just (you)? Cause this is beyond embarrassing

File: 19349735848.jpg (418 KB, 1427x714)

418 KB JPG

>>18686353
I pray that you accept the Lord.

"I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."
- John 8:24

"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world."
- 1 John 4:2-3

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."
- Matthew 28:19-20

>>18686354
>scholars believe it is possible, or even preferable, to translate the third part of the verse as ... was a god.[56][57][58]

>In the October 2011 Journal of Theological Studies, Brian J. Wright and Tim Ricchuiti[68] reason that the indefinite article in the Coptic translation, of John 1:1, has a qualitative meaning.

>An Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible commentary notes:
>This second theos could also be translated 'divine' as the construction indicates "a qualitative sense for theos". The Word is not God in the sense that he is the same person as the theos mentioned in 1:1a; he is not God the Father (God absolutely as in common NT usage) or the Trinity.

>Translations by James Moffatt, Edgar J. Goodspeed and Hugh J. Schonfield render part of the verse as "...the Word [Logos] was divine".

>Murray J. Harris has written: "Accordingly, from the point of view of grammar alone, [QEOS HN hO LOGOS] could be rendered "the Word was a god,...." -Jesus As God, 1992, p. 60.

> Dr. Jason BeDuhn (of Northern Arizona University) in regard to the Kingdom Interlinear's appendix that gives the reason why the NWT favoured a translation of John 1:1 as saying the Word was not "God" but "a god" said: "In fact the KIT [Appendix 2A, p.1139] explanation is perfectly correct according to the best scholarship done on this subject.."

Repent

>>18686358
>I and the Father are One

One what? It doesn’t say "one God".

They are one because they are united in purpose. Not because they are one God.

In John 17 Jesus prays that his disciples too may be one with him and the Father.

>Confirms humanity,

Correct. He was human. Doesn’t mention two natures.

Try again!

>>18686361
>opening himself up to losing his entire social circle to shunning.
They will not touch this because it's true. Their whole cult operates with a high level of self-censorship. They also alienate families from each other via shunning, some dystopian shit.

>>18686366
>slop without addressing the argument
Any word on that denunciation? I want to make sure I'm not wasting my Aryan time with a subhuman jew

>>18686359
>>18686360
I accept your defeat. May the Lord open your eyes like he did for Saul on his way to Damascus.

>>18686361
>Why did you guys feel the need to alter the Bible to try and amend it to suit your theology?

Where?

>Yeah you guys changed the Bible adding "Jehovah"

It’s what the apostles wrote originally. It was altered as kyrios in later copies.

We know because they quote the OT all the time where Jehovah’s name appears.

So you are essentially accusing the apostles of having changed the Bible by adding kyrios instead of YHWH.

>>18686362
He's not the JW he's the socinian

Do all trinitatians have reading comprehension issues? (The answer is yes)

>>18686370
All scholars prove you wrong. John 1:1 says the Word was a god or was divine. Since it is qualitative

I accept your apology, may Jehovah guide you

>>18686369
Name one thing wrong with shunning unrepentent sinners. You can’t. And it’s biblical.

>>18686373
>Do all trinitatians have reading comprehension issues?

Arguing with trinitarians is like playing chess against someone with down syndrome. Winning is easy, but making them understand they lost is impossible.

>>18686368
>It doesn’t say "one God".
What is the Father to jw brainwashed cultists? Clearly not God judging by your brainrotted answer
>Not because they are one God.
It doesn't say "purpose". Your argument is unBiblical. Moreover, the rest of NT confirms what I said. The last serious debate was settled more than 1700 years ago. You're on a history board, learn it instead of making inane comments like a jew. If you want to have the Trinity argument, download the minutes of the Council of Nicaea and challenge them with your unrivalled Biblical knowledge

>>18686379
True

>>18686376
>jew confirmed
Oy vey moshi, (your) bullshit don't fly here. Go run naked with a hard-on against a wall and see if your schnozz breaks

>>18686384
There is nothing more aggravating than arguing with a trinitarian on the internet. I just want to beat them to a bloody pulp

>>18686373
>he's the socinian
Am I supposed to know every judaizing jew who posts here? What the fuck is a socinian anyways?

>>18686378
>divide your families goyim
No, it's not Biblical, but it is very talmudic
Say it ain't so hooknose coin shaving freak

>>18686383
John 17:21 ►
New International Version
"That all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me."

So all the apostles also part of the trinity according to your logic?

Just give up it's embarassing. Jehovah will forgive you.

>>18686386
(you) won't do shit
Just wanted to remind heretics of their inherent impotence

>>18686390
It’s the sinner who divided his family.

>>18686385
>>18686387
>now he's accusing the JW of being a jew

Trinitarianism, not even once

>>18686392
>evades question like a hook nosed rat
Oy gevalt (you) misunderstood the verse my dear low verbal IQ inbred. He is promising them Eternal Life but what would your man-made heretical cult know about that?
>inb4 not Biblical
Eterlan Life is very much Biblical as is the Trinity. Cope and kvetch in your rat hole. Pax et bonum

>>18686394
>refuses to denounce it
>moves goalposts
>shows a childish understanding of NT
>gets BTFO before and after moving goalposts
>says he's not a jew
Ok I'll believe you my fellow goy. Tell me, how was the Truth so well hidden from all Church Doctors, Saints, the Apostles themselves, and the Evangelists who wrote the NT? How come it only was revealed to some random crypto-jew schizo 1850 years later? Was this in the Bible too? Cause my version doesn't have it.

>>18686387
>What the fuck is a socinian anyways?

What is Google?

>>18686394
>the sinner
Enjoy (your) pervert cult. You're too brainwashed to see where it's leading you. But again, don't go spewing your bullshit in public. Maybe it'd be better if countries started shunning your entire "community" and wall you off somewhere

>>18686400
A compromised website

>>18686401
Jesus condemned the congregation of Thyatira because they tolerated a Jezabel who was openly living in sin instead of excommunicating her

I see you are of the same kind. I bet you have homosexual pastors and pro-Israel donations, heretic

File: Screenshot_20260912_10294(...).jpg (451 KB, 1077x1609)

451 KB JPG

>>18686387

>>18686399
>Tell me, how was the Truth so well hidden from all Church Doctors, Saints, the Apostles themselves, and the Evangelists who wrote the NT? How come it only was revealed to some random crypto-jew schizo 1850 years later? Was this in the Bible too?

It’s all explained here

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/faith-in-action-part-1/

>>18686404
>projecting
Jesus also condemned (your) elders in John 8:44 and Rev 3:9 not that you have ever read them.
And I don't pay anything to pissrahell or faggots. If you want to find people like them look at your own elders who have gone at great lengths to cover up their pedophilic actions. Again (you) will move the goalposts or strenuously deny it in light of the overwhelming evidence, but it is what it is.

>>18686409
My elders are not pharisees, heretic. Thry are the spiritual successors ofnthe apostles.

>>18686408
>refuses to denounce it
>replies with heretical antiBiblical slop
Ok fellow goy, you are very organic and you totally blend in

>>18686409
>elders who have gone at great lengths to cover up their pedophilic actions

Name one case where it has ever happened. You can’t

>B-but Australia!!!

Debunked

https://bitterwinter.org/jehovahs-witnesses-and-sexual-abuse-1-the-australian-case/

>>18686411
I denounce the Talmud. Now watch the video

>>18686406
I swear a new heretic crops up every week over here. What else, do we have a Donatist?

>>18686410
The spiritual descendants of the Apostles are the same men who wrote the Nicene Creed ;-)
Unless you claim your elders were hiding somewhere deep in a cave under Aelia Capitolina while Hadrian was building his magnificent city

>>18686414
Donatists are people who wanted traitors to be accountable for their actions. It is apparent you are allergic to JWs shunning sinners because you yourself want to spread sin within Christianity.

>>18686418
>the same men who wrote the Nicene Creed

Nope, they are apostate wolves who have infiltrated the Church as predicted by the Great Apostasy prophecy

True worship was gradually restored starting with brother Russell.

>>18686413
There have been people who have forgone anonimity to unmask the filth of jw child abuse
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/25/jehovahs-witnesses-accused-of-silencing-victims-of-child-abuse-uk

>>18686424
Those pedophiles were not JWs. They were false Christians and Jehovah made sure that they be thrown out of his congregation and handed over to the police

Next!

>>18686419
You are right, I have seen the light. Let's make it global by shunning all JWs worldwide and shipping them to a nice fertile island where they can live happily ever after. Since shunning works against the enemies of Faith, I want these enemies of my Faith to be far far away. Agreed? Is this Biblical? Now get on the boat, the shunning must commence. Bon voyage

>>18686421
So the brothers Russel were hiding with the rabbis in the Ivdaean caves? Are these goys immortal or just very long lived?

>>18686427
>no good jw fallacy
It's your cult that enables that behaviour. It's a systemic problem but your are brainwashed and therefore blind

>>18686429
Ok. Go to website

>>18686428
JWs are the preservers of the faith. They are the guardians of the apostolic deposit. Hence our name, we witness about the Almighty God

>>18686432
No, but the socinians are

>>18686430
Nope. They were not JWs or else they would have never done that.

That’s why Jehovah excommunicated them. Jehovah is all knowing, all seeing.

Can we talk a bit about Gregory Stafford, JW reject?

Guy who destroyed James White and opened my eyes to Socinianism

>>18686432
>no p-please don't ship me off
>I'm the preserver of faith
How compelling. However uou have a ship to board in order to comply with the global and Biblically correct (as you said yourself) shunning decree. You can preserve your "faith" over there. Now please understand that I am being very kind, since traditionally men in my place would have cleansed your heresy by other means

>>18686431
>please read my 19th century goyslop heresy
If it's anti-Trinitarian, it's unBiblical. I can't click on that, my blessed cpu would explode.

>>18686438
Where does it say Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three co-equal and co-eternal persons sharing one essence?

Nowhere, that’s an apostate invention. You have balsphemed the true God

Jehovah is one.

>>18686437
God is sending us to witness to others

>>18686440
>Where does it say
In the Gospel. The debate was settled centuries ago, you are too brainwashed to understand it and by how you type you are low iq as well. Goodbye

>>18686442
Let's hope He doesn't send (you) to my door otherwise you'll be forcibly converted

>>18686435
>no good jw fallacy
>ignoring all his cult's ideology and actions that literally cover up pedophilia among their ranks
>moved goalposts and still got btfo
>brainwashed and brainrotted
>still spews his garbage
Good, keep it online. At least the worst that can happen here is me calling you a hook nosed two faced low iq liar which is pretty much the truth

>>18686444
Nowhere does it say that. This comes from pagan philosophy.

>>18686446
Luke 10:16 ►
“Whoever listens to you listens to me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

Repent.

>>18686438
>If it's anti-Trinitarian, it's unBiblical

Retard

>>18686434
I'll ship you both to Madagascar so you can argue in peace over who's the dumbest heretic between the two.

File: Screenshot_20260912_11081(...).jpg (987 KB, 1080x2340)

987 KB JPG

>>18686448
Does you church teach it is okay to slander?

Slanderer in greek is Diabolos btw, which means Devil.

Interesting!

>>18686453
>another crypto jew that hasn't read the Gospel
I know I know, there's a lot of you "people". But at least try to read what you're arguing against.

File: this overlapping generati(...).png (242 KB, 1200x683)

242 KB PNG

>>18685941
Doesn't matter, they've pushed back the Tribulation by another generation and won't need to do another retcon until the beginning of the 22nd century.

>>18686456
>Theunanimous decisionfrom seven state Supreme Court justices found that religious authorities are not always obligated to report child sexual abuse to authorities due to an exemption in Montana state law.
Fucking lying bastard son of a dirty whore. Here's the case that the pedo "elders" got reversed on a talmudic jew tachnicality. It took 2 seconds of searching, there are thousands at least.

>>18686461
The elders told the parentd to report it. Which is logical

Explain what the problem is or be silent

>>18686137
>I'm a JW, what do you want to know?
Hi I'm OP. Sorry the thread has gone of the rails. I specifically didn't want all this debate about the trinity or extrabiblical topics.
Ok few questions:
1. Why is Jesus Michael and where in the Bible does it say that
2. How come Jesus being a second power in heaven doesn't violate monotheism (John 1:1 "a god")
3. Why does God need Jesus to create the world rather relying on himself?
4. Did Jesus have a physical bodily resurrection and does Jesus have a physical body in heaven right now? Also where is heaven?
5. Did lions eat grass in Eden and if so why are their teeth so sharp and did they become like that after the fall or did they use their sharp teeth to eat grass?

>>18686548
Thank you for the respectful questions and the opportunity to share my pov as a JW.

>Why is Jesus Michael and where in the Bible does it say that

We believe it’s reasonable to think Michael is Jesus for several reasons, which would be too long to list but here are the verses that makes us conclude he is:

https://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/04/why-do-jehovahs-witnesses-conclude-that.html?m=1

Additionally, here are some videos from my brothers in Christ that explain it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UMlzoo0Sps

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuCdcsLza04

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHqhmJPT9k8

And lastly, historically protestants have also said that Michael is another identity of the Son of God, so we are not unique in thinking this:

John Wesley: "Michael here is commonly supposed to mean Christ."

John Gill: "and is no other than Christ the Son of God, an uncreated Angel; who is "one", or "the first of the chief Princes""

Geneva: "even Michael, that is, Christ Jesus the head of angels."

And then I looked at the Wikipedia article for Michael, and at the Protestant section it states:

Citing Hengstenberg, John A. Lees, in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, states: "The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael with the pre-incarnate Christ, finding support for their view, not only in the juxtaposition of the 'child' and the archangel in Rev 12:1-17, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Daniel." Charles Haddon Spurgeon, a Trinitarian, stated that Jesus is Michael “the only Archangel”, and that he is God the Son, and co-equal to the Father. In Spurgeon’s view, "archangel" means "head of the angels" rather than "head angel," and is a title similar to "Prince or Leader of the host." (Daniel 8:11)

>>18686548
>How come Jesus being a second power in heaven doesn't violate monotheism (John 1:1 "a god")

Jesus is God in two senses:

• He is of a divine nature. According to John 1:1, Jesus was a God and he was with God, Jehovah, before the creation of the world. John 1:18 calls Jesus “the only-begotten God”. He is a unique individual deity, distinct from the God he was with in the beginning. This does not make Jesus equal to the Father, for other creatures also posess the divine nature such as the angels.

• He is also called God because he is the representative of the Almighty God who sent him. Jesus has been granted all authority in Heaven and on earth, thus making him the prophesied “mighty God” of Isaiah 9:6, and we submit to his authority as God’s chosen King which is why Thomas could exclaim “My Lord and my God!” in John 20:28. This does not make Jesus ontologically Jehovah, for in Exodus 7:1 Jehovah told Moses that he would make him “God”, meaning that he now has the authority to represent God to others as his prophet. This is the same logic with Jesus Christ, as the foremost spokesman of God, and the exact representation of his being.

>>18686548
>Why does God need Jesus to create the world rather relying on himself?

God does not need anything. He is self-sufficient.

However, God does enjoy sharing his authority with his other children.

This is evident by the Divine Councils that take place in some books where God listens to the suggestions of his heavenly sons. The Book of Psalms (Psalm 82:1), states "God (אֱלֹהִ֔ים Elohim) stands in the divine assembly (בַּעֲדַת-אֵל ‘ăḏaṯ-’êl); He judges among the gods (אֱלֹהִ֔ים elohim)" (אֱלֹהִים נִצָּב בַּעֲדַת־אֵל בְּקֶרֶב אֱלֹהִים יִשְׁפֹּט). The God of Israel rules over a divine assembly of angels. This passage is quoted in the New Testament in John 10:34.[14]

In the Books of Kings (1 Kings 22:19), the prophet Micaiah has a vision of Jehovah seated among "the whole host of heaven" standing on his right and on his left. He asks who will go entice Ahab and a spirit volunteers.

Likewise, Jehovah partnered with his Son in the making and shaping of the universe, like a father directs his son in auto repair. He partnered with prophets like Moses or John the Baptist in guiding his people. He partners with us today to share with the Gospels with people ignorant of his will.

It’s like a mother letting her child cook a meal under her guidance. A son and a father repairing a car. The parents know best and are more experienced, but they still want their child to share in this activity because it beings joy to both of them to work together.

God was happy to have Jesus assist in creation, because as father and son they shared a wonderful moment together.

>>18686548
>Did Jesus have a physical bodily resurrection and does Jesus have a physical body in heaven right now?

The Bible says that Jesus “was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit.” (1 Peter 3:18; Acts 13:34; 1 Corinthians 15:45; 2 Corinthians 5:16).

Jesus’ own words showed that he would not be resurrected with his flesh-and-blood body. He said that he would give his “flesh in behalf of the life of the world,” as a ransom for mankind. (John 6:51; Matthew 20:28)

That’s perfectly logical because if he had taken back his flesh when he was resurrected, he would have canceled that ransom sacrifice. This could not have happened, though, for the Bible says that he sacrificed his flesh and blood “once for all time.” (Hebrews 9:11, 12).

>Also where is heaven?

Outside of our material universe. Another dimension if you will.

>Did lions eat grass in Eden and if so why are their teeth so sharp and did they become like that after the fall or did they use their sharp teeth to eat grass?

No I don’t believe lions ate only grass in Eden. I believe carnivores existed since the beginning.

File: Screenshot 2026-09-12 at (...).png (340 KB, 2358x1022)

340 KB PNG

>>18686573
>No I don’t believe lions ate only grass in Eden. I believe carnivores existed since the beginning.
It seems you're unfamiliar with your own literature. Are you new to the faith?

>>18686591
I am aware of this publication. I just have a different opinion from the Writing Committee of 1982 on the subject.

>>18686594
I'm not interested in your opinion, my questions are directed to faithful JWs.

>>18686595
I am a faithful JW, I have been baptized in 2017.

JWs don’t have to have the same exegesis on matters of no importance on faith and morals. Salvation doesn’t depend on whether lions ate grass.

What a bizarre standard you try to impose on me.

>>18686137

>Interpretations of prophecies are subject to change depending on whether new information moves us to examine them under a new light

>I don’t see the problem


I don't consider you an equal man to other men, Anon.

Disturbing.

>>18686602
Such changes are in harmony with the Bible principle stated at Proverbs 4:18: “The path of the righteous is like the bright morning light that grows brighter and brighter until full daylight.”

Just as the rising sun reveals details of a landscape gradually, God grants an understanding of divine truth progressively, in his due time. (1 Peter 1:10-12) As the Bible foretold, he has accelerated this process during “the time of the end.”—Daniel 12:4.

>>18686597
Sorry if you don't have the same faith as the Watchtower I can't engage further as that is not the purpose of my thread.

>>18686607
JWs do not believe that faith rests upon the question of lions eating grass, sorry to destroy your strawman. I regret thinking you were being sincere

>>18686606

I'm not staying.

I'm saying, I don't consider you equal to me, or to other men. Not even to other men in your religion.

No man thinks that way. None.

Develop self esteem.

>>18685603
They ironically believe the Bible is irrevocably corrupted, as a consequence of their teachings, so why should we care about anything they say?

>>18686613
This is literally the historical interpretation of Proverbs 4:18 no matter what denomination.

Moreover ancient worshippers of God also had mistaken ideas and expectations and needed to adjust their viewpoint.

Moses offered himself as a deliverer for the nation of Israel 40 years ahead of God’s timetable.—Acts 7:23-25, 30, 35.

The apostles failed to understand the prophecy that foretold the Messiah’s death and resurrection.—Isaiah 53:8-12; Matthew 16:21-23.

Some early Christians had wrong ideas about the timing of “the day of Jehovah.”—2 Thessalonians 2:1, 2.

God later corrected their misunderstandings, and we pray that he will continue doing the same for us.—James 1:5.

>>18686617

Develop self esteem.

I pity you. You aren't a man.

Legitimately, are you on the autism spectrum?

>>18685603
>founded in the 1870s, in Pittsburgh PA, America.
lmao yeah this is the true church of Jesus Christ, not the apostolic succession given to Peter in Matthew 16:17-19. sure pal.

There is only one Church, and it is Catholicism+Orthodox. Protestantism, of which JW are a fruit, has always been a heresy. A failed reform movement that inadvertently resulted in new denominations and lay people pretending they have the sacrament of Holy Orders.

>>18686612
Can you point me to a JW.org publication saying that individual Witnesses are free to reject an official doctrinal interpretation simply because it is not essential to salvation?

>>18686619
You're not familiar with our sole resident JW? She's an actual aspie.

>>18686615
You are confusing us with muslims.

>>18686619
>Ad hominem
>Non seguitur

I rest my case

>>18686620
The True religion would be primarily known for it's love toward all (Jn.13:34,35; 1Jn.3:10-12; 4:7, 8). This would include their enemies (Mat.5:44-48; Rom.12:17-20; 1Pet.2:21-23; 3:8- 9). It would not participate in or condone carnal war (2Cor.10:3,4; Isa.2:4).

Apply this basic evidence to what happened in both world wars and current conflicts. People of the same religions met on battlefields and slaughtered one another because of nationalistic differences. Each side claimed to be Christian, and each side was supported by its clergy, who claimed that God was on their side. The definition of a "Christian" is "one who does what Christ would do" (1 Pet.2:21). That slaughter of "Christian" by "Christian" is rotten fruitage. It is a denial of any claim to being the true Church (cf. Mat.26:52). No Christian would continue to associate with these religions (Rev.18:4).

What is the historical record of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants regarding warfare? Jehovah’s Witnesses have never participated in warfare.

>>18686621
It doesn’t need to since it’s common sense. You have to have basic intelligence before becoming a JW, so the Organization assumes JWs have enough braincells to understand this.

>>18686624

I don't consider sutistic retards my equal.

I feel sorry for your father. Anon. I have sons. This is literally my biggest fear.

I feel deeply sorry for your dad.

>>18686621
>official doctrinal interpretation

Whether lions ate grass or not is not part of our core theology and thus not part of doctrine.

I'm curious, do you impose the same standard on your church?

>>18686626
That's not how Watchtower describes the relationship between the individual and the organization. JW publications repeatedly tell members not to rely on their own reasoning when it differs from organizational teaching, to be 'ready to obey' organizational direction, and they distinguish personal conscience matters from doctrinal unity. If you believe individual Witnesses may freely reject official interpretations whenever they think they're unimportant, could you cite a JW.org publication that actually says that?

>>18686634
You are mixing several things together.

Jehovah’s Witnesses are free to question beliefs that aren’t part of their central doctrines. Example: can a Jehovah’s Witness disagree that Jesus is the Archangel Michael or that mankind is actually 1,000,000 years old? Yes, as these have no impact on their salvation.

Jehovah’s Witnesses are free to question beliefs as long as they do not cause division amidst the congregation. Example: can a Jehovah’s Witness insist that his own opinion is correct instead of an official teaching and starts to create arguments within the brotherhood so as to disrupt its unity? If they do, they will face discipline which can lead to disfellowshipping, as that would be considered apostasy.

>>18686637
>Jehovah’s Witnesses are free to question beliefs that aren’t part of their central doctrines.
Please provide a source for your claim

>>18686637

Autistic people shouldn't pretend they're normal.

You're a liar.

>>18686638
common sense

>>18686642
Schizo reply, I ignore

>>18686637

Here's the other thing.

For sure, everyone knows you're sutistic.

Can you give me a single example of this religion removing someone BECAUSEthey are autostic and use their words?

I think, people like you. Are protected outside of normal religion.

I feel deeply sorry for you, but am hugely interested in how your family manages you.

Why don't you talk about being autistic in a religious community?

>>18686649
>Can you give me a single example of this religion removing someone BECAUSEthey are autostic and use their words?

Doesn’t exist

>>18686624
>You are confusing us with muslims.
No, you dumbasses accidentally declared the Bible corrupted, by trying to be special and unique with your beliefs.

>>18686654
>Has the Bible Been Changed or Tampered With?
>No. A comparison of ancient manuscripts shows that the Bible is basically unchanged despite millenniums of recopying on perishable materials.

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/has-the-bible-been-changed/

You are a liar and a child of the Devil.

>>18686648
At this point, if you don't provide a source from JW.org saying you're allowed to pick and choose what they teach based on some distinction of what is a central doctrine or not, then I must conclude you aren't a good faith actor and our conversation ends here. I am interested in having conversations with JWs. I have conversations with JWs in real life. This is not the position they hold and this is not the attitude they take. I get that we're online and you can pretend to be whoever you want so unless you can justify your deviation from how the rest of the organization behaves I have to dismiss you as just a liar on the internet.

>>18686648

You are autistic.

I am not autistic.

This is the only thing thst interets me. I'm not trying to make fun of you, like the other Anon.

You just don't get it, because you're autistic and have no self esteem.

>>18686658
>Name a jw.org sourxe that says JWs are allowed to drink water or that means you can’t!

It’s a good thing not all non-JWs are like you

>>18686662

He's not autistic, Anon.

You don't respect people's time, lying to them the way you do.

Very disappointing for your family.

>>18686657
>A comparison of ancient manuscripts shows that the Bible is basically unchanged despite millenniums of recopying on perishable materials.

Ok, show me a manuscript which has the word Jehovah in the Greek and/or New Testament.

>>18686658
>This is not the position they hold

"Contrary to the claims made about us, Jehovah's Witnesses are free to hold their own ideas and opinions where they do not conflict with the core tenets (below) that distinguish Jehovah's Witnesses as God's true people." https://dismythed.blogspot.com/2009/01/dispelling-myths.html?m=1

You are a liar and a son of the Devil. Conversation terminated.

>>18686668
It was removed by later copists. But it was restored by JWs.

>>18686662
The Watchtower absolutely does not allow you to interpret the Bible however you like. Where the Bible is clear, such as in Genesis 1:30, and Watchtower has put out official publications stating their position on it, you cannot openly disagree with Watchtower and be a member. This is the end of our conversation, goodbye!

>>18686671
>blogspot.com
Lmao!
>We show that members are allowed (though discouraged) to disagree with anything else as long as they keep it to themselves. (1Co 1:10) A member cannot be shunned or restricted for private thoughts, only for sharing dissenting ideas with others unrepentantlly.
Congrats, you played yourself. See ya.

>>18686675
Aka you believe the Bible is irrevocably corrupted, hence my point.

And by that logic, who else what else got removed?
Maybe aliens, or reincarnation, or Joseph Smith, or Mohammed.

>>18686624
>What is the historical record of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants regarding warfare? Jehovah’s Witnesses have never participated in warfare.
>all that mumbo jumbo to dance around the fact that JW is a false church
What you call "rotten fruitage" does not invalidate the Church's authority. It demonstrates that it is composed of sinners. The scripture you quoted about love towards all isn't about the requirements of a true religion and more about what is incumbent upon the individual. In other words they are useless for demonstrating your point. get a clue retard

>>18686676
"
I have known of at least a case of a brother who disagreed with a number of not fundamental teachings. He told the elders and had a couple of friendly meetings with them; they managed to convince him of some points but not of all. And nothing else happened.

The Bible is so broad that the more you descend to analyse details, the more unlikely it is that you agree 100 %, IMHO. I personally disagree in a few unimportant points. It doesn’t mean that I think I am right and our official position is wrong. I simply have a different opinion, but I may be wrong. Or not, since our publications may also be wrong. In a couple of occasions, I disagreed with certain point and that particular point was reassessed in a new publication and it ended up coinciding with my view."

https://www.quora.com/Can-Jehovah-s-Witnesses-disagree-with-anything-written-in-the-watchtower-Is-the-watch-tower-ever-wrong?topAns=1477743652972421

You a are a liar and a son of the Devil. Why do you continue to speak with a genuine Christian?

>>18686680
This is literally what I said earlier, if someone spreads division they are not welcome. Which is not thr same as disagreeing with a published exegesis

Why did trinitarians never learn how to read?

>>18686681
>the Bible is irrevocably corrupted

Nope, many NT translations have the Divine Name in it

>>18686684
Another evidence is that the true religion would be made up of people who would all be in agreement on doctrine. It would not have members who believe differently on abortion, war, homosexuality or morals. Its members would not "agree to disagree" (1Cor.1:10; 2Cor.13:11; Phil.1:27). True Christians would be separated from the world by "truth" from God's Word the Bible (Jn.17:17; 4:23). All its teachings would be based on the Bible (2 Tim. 3:14-16; Gal. 1:8, 9).

The true religion would have a reputation for promoting exceptional morality in its members (1Cor.6:9,10; Eph.5:3-5; 2 Pet.3:14; 2Cor.7:1; 2Tim.3:5). Does a religion require their congregation members to live moral lives, not allowing practicers of homosexuality, fornication, or adultery to be accepted members of their congregation? Or do they turn a blind eye? If so, their "fruitage" would show they are not true Christians.

True Christians would be associated with God's name: (Jn.17:3,6,26; Acts 15:14/Isa.55:5; 1 Peter 2:9/Ex.19:4- 5; Ps.83:18). They would not use Bibles which have removed the Most Holy Divine Name of God. Replacing the Divine Name with the common noun "Lord" cannot be justified by any translational principles so it is a blatant "subtraction" from God's word which brings a curse on anyone who approves it (Rev.22:18).

The true Church would be engaged in an unprecedented teaching activity (Matthew 24:14, 28:19, 20). Witnesses right now are performing the greatest Bible education work ever done in all human history!

>>18686694
>Another evidence is that the true religion would be made up of people who would all be in agreement on doctrine.
Clearly not the case in your religion as demonstrated by
>>18686594

>>18686712
Whether lions ate grass or not is not doctrine

Try again!

File: Liller1_-_HST_-_Potw2221a.jpg (3.38 MB, 3474x1819)

3.38 MB JPG

>>18686432
In the Gospel of Matthew it says:

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
- Matthew 16:18

"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."
- Matthew 28:20

So we see from this that God not only promised continuity and preservation of His word, but also church continuity as well. The JW were a cult started in the 1800's and didn't exist before then, so this whole JW narrative violates church continuity. The same goes for other cults like the various branches of Catholicism before that, and heresies like Marcionism even earlier.

File: 1733957618928922.jpg (329 KB, 1200x1200)

329 KB JPG

>>18686566
>John 1:18 calls Jesus “the only-begotten God”.
That's a gnostic corruption of John 1:18. The original says, "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."

Note that this verse of John says, "only-begotten Son," or «ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός».

>This does not make Jesus ontologically Jehovah,
In the book of Philippians it says:

"That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
(Philippians 2:10-11)

Notice how it says "that Jesus Christ is Lord." The word "Lord" in New Testament Greek represents the name of God in the Old Testament Hebrew, יְהוָה

Philippians 2:11 is also a direct reference to God speaking in Isaiah 45. See below:

"Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear."
- Isaiah 45:22-23

Thus Philippians is clearly connecting Jesus Christ directly with the speaker of Isaiah 45. As it says, "that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord." (Philippians 2:11). This is referring to the LORD God of Isaiah chapter 45. Jesus Christ is that LORD God according to the Biblical account. It is very plain and obvious.

>>18686569
>God was happy to have Jesus assist in creation,
In Hebrews chapter 1 it says the Son is upholding all things by the word of His power.

"Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;"
- Hebrews 1:2-3

That contradicts the narrative you've provided here completely.

File: 1711311950758531.jpg (136 KB, 950x496)

136 KB JPG

>>18686573
>Jesus’ own words showed that he would not be resurrected with his flesh-and-blood body.
Not true, see the following:

"Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet."
- Luke 24:39-40

"Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again."
- John 10:17-18

"And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing."
- John 20:26-27

>>18686955
Spirit creatures can take on human form. For example, angels who did this in the past even ate and drank with humans. (Genesis 18:1-8; 19:1-3) However, they still were spirit creatures and could leave the physical realm.—Judges 13:15-21.

After his resurrection, Jesus also assumed human form temporarily, just as angels had previously done. As a spirit creature, though, he was able to appear and disappear suddenly. (Luke 24:31; John 20:19, 26) The fleshly bodies that he materialized were not identical from one appearance to the next. Thus, even Jesus’ close friends recognized him only by what he said or did.—Luke 24:30, 31, 35; John 20:14-16; 21:6, 7.

When Jesus appeared to the apostle Thomas, he took on a body with wound marks. He did this to bolster Thomas’ faith, since Thomas doubted that Jesus had been raised up.—John 20:24-29

Hope this helps :)

>>18686694
>Nope, many NT translations have the Divine Name in it
And that's irrelevant, because the manuscripts they are based on have been tampered with in such a crucial doctrine, therefor they are unreliable.

>>18686992
You are proving my point. We know what have been tampered with and what hasn’t

>>18685603
JWSchizo is pulling out all the alts for this weekend lmao
I don't know who is worst DESU, him or Pakistani Bro

Joining JW would be a good excuse to wear suits and LARP as someone successful.

File: R136_in_NGC_2070.jpg (2.29 MB, 3840x3923)

2.29 MB JPG

>>18686694
>Replacing the Divine Name with the common noun "Lord" cannot be justified by any translational principles so it is a blatant "subtraction" from God's word which brings a curse on anyone who approves it (Rev.22:18).
This is the most nonsensical thing I've seen today. The New Testament writers quoted from the Old Testament and used the term Lord (ὁ κύριος) when translating Psalm 110:1. Compare:

"The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool."
(Psalm 110:1)

"For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,"
(Acts 2:34)

So you are saying the apostle Peter in the literal New Testament is wrong for using the term ὁ κύριος (aka LORD) to refer to the divine name from Psalm 110. Obviously I'm going to side with the Bible on this one.

>>18687030
>The New Testament writers quoted from the Old Testament and used the term Lord (ὁ κύριος)

Wrong.

Kyrios was added by later copyists. The apostles faithfully wrote the Divine Name in the original manuscripts.

Shame on you for accusing the apostles of having corrupted the Word of God.

>>18687033
>Kyrios was added by later copyists.
See >>18686924

>>18685603
You can literally make up your own headcanon about anything quoting the Bible. It is absolutely not a simple text.

>>18687034
"Jehovah said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool."
(Psalm 110:1)

"For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, Jehovah said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,"
(Acts 2:34)

What’s your point

Gregory Stafford's rudeness made me 180 from my plans to join JW.

That can't be healthy, look at his sick obsession with Sam Shamoun. Dozens of videos ranting about him, calling him fatso and other names.
https://m.youtube.com/@CWJahTube

>>18687039
Greg Stafford is not a JW

>>18687039
Stafford is unhinged and has been disowned by JWs

>>18687038
The text of Acts 2:34 says this: «οὐ γὰρ Δαβὶδ ἀνέβη εἰς τοὺς οὐρανούς λέγει δὲ αὐτός Εἶπεν ὁ κύριος τῷ κυρίῳ μου Κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου».

Notice the use of the term ὁ κύριος in reference to the Hebrew יְהוָה in Acts 2:34 (and other New Testament verses as well).

>>18685603
God left a Church. The Holy Spirit guided the Church to interpret the inspired writings correctly. Interpreting Christology from the Bible on your own is like interpreting poetry. There is no definitive answer without sacred tradition. There is no way to know Matthew actually wrote Matthew without sacred tradition. If you decide to appeal to the history "experts", you'll just reach Atheism.

>>18687040
>>18687042
Yeah but I was thinking maybe JW broke his mind

>>18685636
>The grant the tradition that establishes the biblical canon, affirming that all the works in the canon are divinely inspired,
Why? How does that make sense? It's ONE singular tradition. The Bible is our tradition.

>>18687043
>The tampered copy of the text of Acts says

Ok

Also Stafford "walks and talks" like a crook. I mean based on what criminals in movies act like. Like a really trash guy who would scam his own family out of money.

>>18686139
>Where does it say the Church Fathers have perfectly and indefinitely preserved the teachings of Christ?
The Holy Spirit. The is no other alternative where Christianity is remotely reliable btw. Either Jesus left a visible Church or the Bible is bullshit that we have no reason to believe.

>>18687046
Jehovah guides whom he wills

>>18687053
The Holy Spirit said the son of destruction would first come. Hence the great apostasy

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=njFCZL3xglY

This one is kinda funny but unintentionally funny mostly. He is analyzing Sam shamous holding of a coffee cup with 2 hands and Claims this indicates thay Sam is on his death bed

>>18686137
Why are you in a burger cult? Aren't you embarassed of being Mormon/Scientologist-tier?

>>18687058
>>18687051
I respectfully do not care about this apostate

File: 1689312387238299-b.jpg (3.74 MB, 2898x3102)

3.74 MB JPG

>>18687045
>Interpreting Christology from the Bible on your own is like interpreting poetry
If the Holy Spirit is guiding you into all truth, you will arrive at the true meaning every time and not private interpretations.

"And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?"
(Luke 11:9-13)

"Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."
(1 Corinthians 2:12-13)

"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."
(1 John 2:27)

>>18687060
Is he an apostate or a reject

>>18687059
The Organization of JWs was founded in Jerusalem during Pentecost 33 AD.

>>18687062
Same thing

>>18687053
>Either Jesus left a visible Church
Yes, like I said here: >>18686924

File: images-1.jpg (32 KB, 512x390)

32 KB JPG

>>18687068
The visible Church is here

>>18686353
>The Bible is not infalible in matters of faith and morals
Ok, you're not Christian/whatever you think is the correct term. Thanks for playing.

>>18687070
That's a cult, anon. Did you read my post?

>>18687074
>it’s a cult because...they actually follow Christ and worship the true God!

I rest my case

>>18687078
Didn't read it. My post says they didn't exist before the 1800's.

>>18687080

The Organization of JWs was founded in Jerusalem during Pentecost 33 AD

File: 4tn3o.png (559 KB, 640x502)

559 KB PNG

>>18687083
We all know that isn't true, anon

Jehovah is a fanfiction name.

File: Hutter_Mal_1_12_Underlined.png (651 KB, 1324x396)

651 KB PNG

>>18687086
It's a pretty direct transliteration of the Hebrew form יְהוָה

>>18687088
It doesn't have vowels. It just reads YHWH and that can be read a dozen different ways depending on what vowels you insert.
The scholarly consensus actually favors "Yahweh" over "Jehovah".
Your gang might wanna consider a rebranding.

>>18687092
Yahweh is Hebrew. Jehovah is english.

If you're so upset about the name Jehovah then stop using Jesus, Jerusalem and Jeremiah and start saying Yehoshuah, Yirusalima and Yiremiyahu (you won’t)

>>18687094
All of the New Testament was written in koine greek so the English pronunciations are actually closer to the source text than the Hebrew variants. JWs are really uneducated about scripture...

>>18687061
The Holy Spirit guided me to LDS. You have no rebuttal to this without apostolic succession.

>>18687096

If you're so upset about the name Jehovah then stop using Jesus, Jerusalem and Jeremiah and start saying Yehoshuah, Yirusalima and Yiremiyahu (you won’t)

>>18687092
>It doesn't have vowels.
The text that I posted does.

>Your gang might wanna consider a rebranding.
Not sure what you mean.

>>18687088
>>18687094
>>18687099
>>18687100
https://youtu.be/__7t_bGI8oo?si=xMew5Z8ogHnoWjN3

>>18687105
That doesn't explain why you think a text with vowels doesn't have them. I still don't get what you actually mean.

>>18687099
Run out of tokens?

>>18687100
>Not sure what you mean.
Taking the lords name in vain is a serious sin. That's why the pronunciation was forgotten in the first place. Jews would rather not say it at all except behind closed doors during ceremonies.
So parading a likely wrong pronunciation around is a dangerous game to play.

>the text that I posted does
Yes, because Elias Hutter, a 16th century German scholar added one. I'm sure he did it to his best ability, but Yahweh is considered the more likely pronunciation by modern scholars.

>>18687112
>That's why the pronunciation was forgotten in the first place.
We have the pointed Hebrew text, not just with respect to the Tetragrammaton, but throughout the whole Old Testament.

>Jews would rather not say it at all except behind closed doors during ceremonies. So parading a likely wrong pronunciation around is a dangerous game to play.
I assume you're one of those people that claims to be a Jew then. You should know that the modern people group claiming that name has nothing to do with the biblical Jews or Israel.

>Yes, because Elias Hutter, a 16th century German scholar added one.
He had manuscripts, probably many of the same ones that Daniel Bomberg and others used. Jerome in his commentaries referred to the vowel pointings of Hebrew words. I could go on but you get the point.

>>18687105
>>18687112
>still won’t say Yiremiyahu

I rest my case, hypocrite

>>18687116
The dot system was introduced during the creation of the Masoretic Text (earliest 6th century CE).
The pronounciation of YHWH was already long forgotten by then and you were not supposed to say YHWH out loud in the first place. You were supposed to substitude "Adonai". The dots in your picture are for "Adonai" as a visual reminder.
Elias Hutter wasn't aware of that.

>>18687119
Are you retarded? Jehovah is not translated from Hebrew. It's translated from retardation. This wouldn't be that huge of an issue if you werent autistic about it too.

>>18687124
Jehovah is english for YHWH

>>18687120
I'm glad you don't deny the fact that those who claim to be Jews today have no connection to the actual people of Israel.

The rest of what you say is irrelevant. Jerome and our other sources predate the 6th century AD, and they refer to the vowels and punctuation. Even the Aramaic and LXX differ in the vowel pointings from the original Hebrew qere in a few places we can point to, showing that all of it existed back then.

>>18685603
The old logo of the silhouette of an actual Watchtower was better. Minimalist corporatism is a cancer to all logs.

>>18687127
They are a cult what did you expect?

>>18687126
I'm not a Jew. No idea why assumed I am one.

>Jerome and our other sources predate the 6th century AD, and they refer to the vowels and punctuation.
Jerome was likely referring to the vowel usage in the spoken language, not the written Mesoratic dot system.

What other sources?

>christian mystery cult
>not gnostic
what's even the point?

>>18687007
>We know what have been tampered with and what hasn’t
That's begging the question

File: 3d819e02fb.png (67 KB, 736x588)

67 KB PNG

>>18687132
>Jerome was likely referring to the vowel usage in the spoken language,
In his commentary on Genesis 47:31, Jerome writes, "In this place some have pretended in vain that Jacob gave worship to the top of his staff [rather than worshipping God while leaning on his staff]. But in Hebrew it is read quite differently; in honoring his son he gave thanks for the power granted to him, worshipping at the head of his bed."

In Genesis 47:31, the word “ מִטָּה ” = “bed” is used in the Hebrew text. This word is considered to be different from the word “ מַטֶּה ” = “staff”. However, the only difference between these two words in Hebrew is their different vowels. Technically Hebrews 11:21 is a reference to Genesis 48:1ff., though it is sometimes confused with Genesis 47:31 immediately preceding it, and this is likely what Jerome was referring to here.

If there were no Hebrew vowels in the text of Genesis, Jerome’s assertion would become that the Hebrew is not read מטה, but, “quite differently,” מטה, although both “alternatives” would be exactly the same.

Elsewhere in his commentary on Ezekiel 27:18, Jerome wrote, “Hebrew nouns have very different interpretations, from the difference of accent, and the change of letters and vowels, especially such as have their peculiar uses.” In his commentary on Jonah, Jerome says, “I am quite surprised at some translations, since in Hebrew there is no such close relation between letters, syllables, accents, and words.” And in his commentary on Genesis 19:33, he writes, “They point the word ‘she arose’ [as] ‘Bheqomah’. ” (corresponding to וּבְקוּמָהּ).

>What other sources?
I mentioned two of them. Compare the Syriac and LXX in places like Jeremiah 40:8. The LXX pronunciation was translated from “ עֹופַי ” (Hebrew kethiv vowels) while the Peshitta and Targum both translated from “ עֵיפַי ” (Hebrew qere alternate vowels). The only difference between pronunciations are the vowels. For punctuation (verse divisions) see Papyrus 957.

>>18687140
>mystery
>everything is published publicly

>>18687143
That’s paleography

File: scan2.png (191 KB, 848x1227)

191 KB PNG

>>18687147
Also you have the shortening of names that start with the same two syllables of the divine name, see attached.

And no, this has nothing to do with the modern JW cult. This goes way back to the roots of our bible translations, including the KJV.

>>18687147
In Jerome's own words, he moved to Bethlehem and hired Jewish scholars to teach him Hebrew and read the texts aloud to him.
He knows a bed is a bed, because that's how his tutors read it to him.
"Accents" can refer to a way of speaking, not just text hints.

>spaces
That's far from a formalized system of vowel dots hints.

>>18686694
>Another evidence is that the true religion would be made up of people who would all be in agreement on doctrine.
Yeah that's Catholicism. If you're telling me that's a requirement for a valid religion you're just wrong. People have different thoughts on things depending on who they are and what they've experienced. You cannot tell me JWs or anyone else meet that criteria.

Where are you getting the authority to say what the "true Church" is or isn't. You're a retard on 4chan who is citing prooftexts out of their proper context in order to tell me a religion founded in Pennsylvania is the correct Christianity and the one founded in Caesarea Philippi by Jesus Christ himself. Apostles are a thing. Apostolic succession exists. Protestantism does not have it because, like Judaism, its entire existence is founded on opposing the Church.

>>18687264

Yeah, she's literally a retard.

File: figaro.jpg (1.18 MB, 2838x1705)

1.18 MB JPG

>>18687276
nah i think she's just sheltered, autistic, and suffering from Dunning-Kruger like lots of other protties. if she actually knew history or how to read scripture she'd see how hollow and false all the fruits of Luther are. just lies upon lies.

>>18687264
>that's Catholicism

Lol

Lmao

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOUxlD4vySI

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_LGBTQ_Catholics

>>18687429
>cites some 21st century bullshit and satanist-run wikipedia
Again, the things you are saying do not invalidate the authority of the Church. They prove it is composed of sinners, some of them unrepentant.

Why is gen z incapable of nuanced thinking. Everything has to be black or white all good or all bad. Y'all asexual aromantic ipad babies are the end of western civilization.

>>18685603
The whole point of being a JW is to be wrong. Their whole religion is wrong, their predictions are constantly wrong, their leadership is wrong, their behavior is wrong. Their biblical conclusions being wrong are the least of it. And the JW's are well aware of this, it's how most cults function, the more wrong behavior you accept, the more evidence that you are in the special group. If you can accept a never ending delugue of falsity, then you are clearly one of the chosen. And the people telling you how wrong you are, even though they are right, is just more evidence of their inevitable doom.

>>18687521
>They prove it is composed of sinners

Correct. Praying to Mary, believing in hellfire, being involved in wars and politics, and calling God a trinity are sins.

>>18687742
Shalom

>>18687799
Don't make me post all the articles about how the JWs are all pedophiles.

>>18687927
I challenge you to name a single JW who raped a child

You will not

>>18687944
Is it a common thing for JWs to try and win arguments on technicalities like there being thousands of reported cases, but the names of the perpetrators being kept under wraps, so you ask specifically for names?

>>18687952
Why doesn't the victim name the pedophile and bring them to the police then?

Jehovah doesn’t want child abusers inside his congregation, hence why we disfellowship evil people

>>18687952
>Is it a common thing for JWs to try and win arguments on technicalities?

Only if by technicality you mean fundamentals like the divinity of Christ and the afterlife, and by trying to win you mean winning by a landslide.

(Socinian here)

>>18687996
Sexual misconduct accusations are a common strategy to slander people and organizations. Why don't they just go to the police and let justice prevail? None of these stories make a lot of sense to me. For instance, why would you leave a person who can't defend himself alone with someone who can rape him?

A lot of questions but never any answers that make sense.

>>18688013
True

>>18688013
>Why don't they just go to the police and let justice prevail?
Because you get shunned out of the community when you accuse elders and create any kind of negative publicity for the organization.

>>18688003
Rah-Rah idiot

>>18688019
If fitting in is more important to you than justice, then you're part of the problem.

>>18688021
The shunning process is the problem. It's not about "fitting in", it's about having your life destroyed because you criticized the elders or the organizatoin. JWs will cut out family members and friends. That's the problem. Of course this will make victims shut up about it. And then people like you come along and accuse them of being the problem for not speaking up louder.
There is a special place in Gehenna for this kind of gasslighting.

In all these rape stories (be it about the Catholic church, about coaches in sports teams, about JW) I ask myself a lot of questions such as

>Why would you leave your children alone with an adult man who is not a eunuch? I would never leave my children (if I finally am lucky to have them) alone with anyone who is not their mother
>Why wouldn't you train your children from an early age to go fucking ballistic in case someone comes remotely close to their private parts? I would teach my children to go fucking nuts and promise them I would avenge them come what may with 70 fold amounts of blood
>in case of adult women claiming Harvey raped them, why didn't they put up a fight? A woman going fucking nuts is not to be underestimated. They can take out your eyes, rip off your balls like a chimp (srs)

A lot of these stories seem fake to be honest.

>>18688030
>>Why would you leave your children alone with an adult man who is not a eunuch?
Because people trust their priests and holy men. They are supposed to be the pillars of the community.

>>18688029
Romans 16:17 ►
New International Version
I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

Do you think you are smarter than Paul?

>>18688029
>If someone in the congregation becomes guilty of violating a criminal law, such as by committing child abuse, he is sinning against the secular authorities. (Compare Acts 25:8.) While the elders are not authorized to enforce the law of the land, they do not shield any perpetrator of child abuse from the legal consequences of his sin. (Rom. 13:4) The sinner reaps what he has sown.—Gal. 6:7

>Elders assure victims and their parents and others with knowledge of the matter that they are free to report an allegation of abuse to the secular authorities. But what if the report is about someone who is a part of the congregation and the matter then becomes known in the community? Should the Christian who reported it feel that he has brought reproach on God’s name? No. The abuser is the one who brings reproach on God’s name.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-may-2019/love-justice-face-of-wickedness/

You are a liar and a son of the devil.

>>18688032
They shouldn't. I went to a social occasion recently after church where the priest and nuns were present as well as the congregation. (Catholic) and there was one priest who asked for my wife's number right in front of me. Another one asked (both of them congolese I believe) us how we met and commented on how Congolese women are good and deliscious (indirectly stating he wants to smash my wife). 100% true story.

They were obviously inebriated after slamming down a lot of strong beer which gave them liquid courage. I am a real hard ass so I drink only water, I don't even drink coffee or tea since they are psycho stimulants which I consider haram.

Just pointing out that there is no reason at all to believe that priests are somehow never acting like a disgrace just because they are a priest. They are merely flesh after all.

>>18688034
Speak out for those who cannot speak, for the rights of all the destitute. Speak out, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy." -- Proverbs 31:8–9

"Anyone, then, who knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins." -- James 4:17:

"Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, 'Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,' but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it?" -- James 2:15–16

>Do you think you are smarter than Paul?
Accusing those who demand justice of causing division and obstacles is perverting Paul's words to commit injustice.

>>18688040
None of these verses refute the fact thqt Paul said to shun those who cause division within the body of Christ.

>Accusing those who demand justice

Unrepentant sinners do not demand justice, they demand the destruction of God’s Organization

>>18688039
I'm not happy about it, I feel like they disrespected me. And I didn't even do shit. Tell me what you guys would have done. Honest reactions please.

>>18688045
Catholic priests do not represent God. They represent Babylon the great

>>18688044
I posted those verses so you can recognize the evil you are helping to commit and repent

>>18688046
I'm trying to judge how I handled it but I can't be objective about myself. One part is saying
>you did well by not reacting and being calm, just a bunch of drunks running their mouths obliviously, no harm done

The other part is saying
>you're weak and pathetic, it has been established now that there will be no retribution for smashing

>>18688049
None of these verses contradict what Paul said about shunning evil people.

Why are you so upset that JWs avoid unrepentent sinners?

>>18688050
You are not weak. You did the right thing

Revelation 18:4 ►
New International Version
Then I heard another voice from heaven say: “’Come out of her, my people,’ so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues;

>>18688046
They said a lot of things that made me truly question their faith and sincerity. When we mentioned we lived at X, they were amused and said to each other "that's right next to our cemetery, our final destination hehehe"

I get it that they were drunk and having a good time but still that made it feel like they were atheists.

>>18688053
>You are not weak. You did the right thing

Or maybe I did the right thing because it was the easiest thing to do. Not doing anything. This type of thing makes you ask a lot of questions after the fact. Surely it's not a good look to verbally and or physically trash a priest so I felt like there weren't any good options so just went with the most reasonable one

File: Screenshot_20260912_16284(...).jpg (764 KB, 1080x1907)

764 KB JPG

>>18688055
The catholic church does not walk by the Spirit of God

>>18688051
Criticizing your organization or making truthful accusations against members of your organization in public does not make the accusers "unrepentent sinners".
You created a mechanism that is used to maintain and protect a sinful establishment. What do you think Jesus would think about that?

>>18688057
Jehovah is calling you to something better. He sees your sincere heart

>>18688046
I'm socinian so just go to catholic church once in a while to make my wife happy.

>>18688059
>Elders assure victims and their parents and others with knowledge of the matter that they are free to report an allegation of abuse to the secular authorities.
>But what if the report is about someone who is a part of the congregation and the matter then becomes known in the community? Should the Christian who reported it feel that he has brought reproach on God’s name?
>No. The abuser is the one who brings reproach on God’s name.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-may-2019/love-justice-face-of-wickedness/

You are a liar and a son of the devil.

>>18688062
>2019
Assuming this is actually applied consistently, what happened to abuse pre-2019? Was there an investigation?

>>18688060
Thank you men. I didn't count how many beers they drank, but multiple ones of the 8% Alcohol variety. Alcohol and other drugs awaken and feed the devil that is inside of us all. Stick to water only. Even orange juice is risky, that sugar can flood you with dopamine, making you too happy for your own good.

>>18688064
January 1, 1986 Watchtower:

> "Shocking as it is, even some who have been prominent in Jehovah’s organization have succumbed to immoral practices, including homosexuality, wife swapping, and CHILD MOLESTING. It is to be noted, also, that during the past year, 36,638 individuals had to be disfellowshipped from the Christian congregation, the greater number of them for practicing immorality. Jehovah’s organization must be kept clean!(1 Corinthians 5:9-13)"

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1986003

You are a liar and a son of the devil.

My wife is catholic but a lot of her friends and family are JW. I met a lot of them and none of them seem like child molesters to me. They're just people like you and me.

>>18688066
God sees what you do for his glory and he will reward you for that

He is our Father and never will he abandon his children

Ideally there should be schools with only female teachers and staff, so you're sure that your child is never alone with a man.

Considering that's not realistic, I retract my previous statement as being overly optimistic. It does in fact not seem possible to prevent your children from being potentially raped.

>>18688069
Nobody no child molesters were expelled. The common accusation is high ranking people in the organization get protected and victims who speak up get shunned instead of receiving justice.
So what does that quote prove?

>>18688075
I am sorry that you never acquired reading comprehension

>>18688075
Nobody said*

>>18688075
1962, November 15 Watchtower from that year on page 693:

>"9 Worldly authorities render a judgment and punish persons, whether they are inside the congregation or outside, if they violate the laws of decency and good order. The violators have no right to complain at such punishment, as Paul showed by his words before Caesar’s judgment seat. (Acts 25:11) Hence the Christian congregation cannot protect any of its members if they steal, smuggle, commit bigamy, murder, libel, defraud, and so forth. The congregation must release such guilty members to punishment by worldly authorities. Since the guilty break the laws of the land and thus oppose the “authority,” they are taking a stand against God’s arrangement.
>10 The Christian congregation has no orders from God and has no right to protect such opposers and lawbreakers from the due punishment by the “authority” of the land. We cannot hinder, oppose or condemn the execution of the krima or judgment by aiding or shielding lawbreakers. To do so would put the Christian congregation also in opposition to God’s arrangement. Besides letting the krima or “judgment” take its course upon offending members who bring reproach upon God’s people, the congregation may disfellowship such lawbreakers. The congregation does not want to deserve a krima or “judgment” with the lawbreakers by siding or cooperating with them and opposing the worldly “authority.” It also wants no reproach."

>>18688075
>high ranking people in the organization get protected and victims who speak up get shunned instead of receiving justice.

When you go to the cops those guys will get a raging hard-on thinking about busting some successful and upstanding member of the community, suit and tie, clean shaven the whole thing, and put the cuffs on him while publicly humiliating him, no judge or jury required.

So no I don't believe the stories of the powerless victims

>>18688075
March 23, 1992 letter:

>"If a current case of child abuse comes to light in your congregation, elders should do what they can to protect children from further abuse. (See “Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock” page 93.)" Upon referring to page 93 the elders would find this statement: "Victims of sexual abuse need to be treated with extreme thoughtfulness and kindness. Elders should always do what they reasonably can to protect children from further abuse; follow the Society's directives on such matters. (g85 1/22 p. 8)"

>>18688075
February 15, 2002 letter:

>"Never suggest to anyone that they should not report an allegation of child abuse to the police or other authorities. If you are asked, make it clear that whether to report the matter to the authorities or not is a personal decision for each individual to make and that there are no congregation sanctions for either decision. That is, no elder will criticize anyone who reports such an allegation to the authorities."

1992 letter:

>"It is also a personal decision if the alleged victim chooses to report such accusations to the secular authorities." And in fact, the letter continues by saying: "all in the Christian congregation would want to consider their personal and moral responsibility to alert the appropriate authorities in cases where there has been committed or there exists a risk that there might be committed a serious criminal offence of this type..."

>>18688078
>Besides letting the krima or “judgment” take its course upon offending members who bring reproach upon God’s people, the congregation may disfellowship such lawbreakers.
"may"

What if elders are the abusers?

>>18687944
https://www.sokolovelaw.com/personal-injury/sexual-abuse/clergy-abuse/jehovah-witness/

>>18688070
>Catholic

>>18688078
Why are you trusting Watchtower issues that have less relevance to salvation than the fact lions used to eat grass in Eden? As you've already said,
>I am aware of this publication. I just have a different opinion from the Writing Committee of 1982 on the subject.
You're just wasting everyone's time by quotedumping irrelevent bullshit.

I'm always confused as to why these cults pretend they don't abuse children, like that's the JW's whole thing, they take children away from their friends, they isolate them, they demand strict adherence to doctrine, this is certainly some form of abuse, the sexual abuse can hardly be shocking in this context.

>>18688116
I think the better way to raise children is to lead by example, show them the right way to behave. Keep Bible study for when they're old enough to make up their own mind