When reasoning in a potentially adversarial environment, the best tactic is to ask questions. We see Jesus using this method over and over with great success. In short, to get your point across: ASK, DON’T TELL.
Witnesses are trained to accept instruction from men in authority. Elders, Circuit Overseers, and Governing Body members tell them what to do and they do it. They are trained to put complete trust in these men, to the point where they entrust them with their very salvation.
The other sheep should never forget that their salvation depends on their active support of Christ’s anointed “brothers” still on earth.
(w12 3/15 p. 20 par. 2 Rejoicing in Our Hope)
In turn, we approach from a position of weakness in their eyes. We have none of the authority they hold in such high esteem. In this we are no different from our Lord. He was a mere carpenter’s son and came from a despised province. His credentials could hardly have been poorer. (Mt 13:54-56; John 7:52) His apostles were fishermen and the like; unlettered men. (John 7:48, 49; Acts 4:13) Notably, he experienced the least success in his home territory, prompting him to say:
“A prophet is not without honor except in his home territory and in his own house.” (Mt 13:57)
Similarly, we often find that those closest to us, parents, siblings and dear friends, will have the hardest time accepting what we say. Like Jesus, we are overcoming years of indoctrination and the powerful influence of peer pressure. With our words, we are challenging the biggest authority figures in their life. Few will view what we have as pearls of such great value. (Mt 13:45, 46)
With so much stacked against us, let us do our best to reach hearts by speaking kindly and respectfully; by not pushing our newfound understandings on unreceptive ears; and by always endeavoring to find the right questions to help our loved ones to think and reason for themselves. Our discussions should never become a contest of wills, but rather a cooperative search for truth.
With this in mind, let us tackle the first of the criteria points highlighted in the previous article in this series.
Getting the discussion going is always the hardest part. There are many techniques that can be employed. For example, let us say you have been missing a lot of meetings. You might say to a family member, “I guess you’ve noticed I haven’t been at that many meetings lately. I imagine there’s a lot of speculation and gossip as to why, but I’d like to tell you the reason myself, so that you don’t get the wrong idea.”
You could then continue by saying that there are number of things that have caused you to be concerned. Without divulging more details, ask your friend or family member to read Revelation 20:4-6
“And I saw thrones, and those who sat on them were given authority to judge. Yes, I saw the souls of those executed for the witness they gave about Jesus and for speaking about God, and those who had not worshipped the wild beast or its image and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand. And they came to life and ruled as kings with the Christ for 1,000 years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the 1,000 years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6 Happy and holy is anyone having part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no authority, but they will be priests of God and of the Christ, and they will rule as kings with him for the 1,000 years.” (Re 20:4-6)
Now ask him or her if the faithful and discreet slave is going to be part of these kings and priests. That answer must be “Yes” since that is in line with what the Organization publishes. Additionally, the Governing Body now teaches that it is the faithful slave, therefore it must be part of the ones Revelation 20:4 is referring to.
At some point, the person you’re talking to is going to believe you’re leading them up the garden path and may resist. They may even guess where you’re going, and think you’re just laying a trap. Don’t deny that you are leading them to a conclusion. We do not want to appear sly or conniving, so be up front and tell them that you just taking them on the same journey you traveled to arrive at your current understanding. If they put pressure on you to get the point, try to resist. If they don’t reason on all the facts, it will be easier for them to miss the implications.
Next ask who the image of the wild beast is. They should know that off the top of their head. Just in case they don’t, here’s the Organization’s teaching:
“Since World War II, the image of the wild beast—now manifested as the United Nations organization—has already killed in a literal way.”
(re chap. 28 p. 195 par. 31 Contending With Two Ferocious Beasts
“An additional significant factor is that when Babylon the Great goes down under the devastating attack of the ten horns of the symbolic wild beast, her fall is mourned by her companions in fornication, the kings of the earth, and also by the merchants and shippers who dealt with her in supplying luxurious commodities and gorgeous fineries.”
(it-1 pp. 240-241 Babylon the Great)
Get your friend or family member to acknowledge that according to Revelation 20:4, the “kings and priests” have never committed spiritual fornication with the wild beast or its image, unlike Babylon the Great as depicted in the above image.
Now ask them if the Organization teaches that the Catholic Church is part of Babylon the Great. Next read this extract from the June 1, 1991 Watchtower.
9…“If Christendom had sought peace with Jehovah’s King, Jesus Christ, then she would have avoided the coming flash flood.—Compare Luke 19:42-44.
10 However, she has not done so. Instead, in her quest for peace and security, she insinuates herself into the favor of the political leaders of the nations—this despite the Bible’s warning that friendship with the world is enmity with God. (James 4:4) Moreover, in 1919 she strongly advocated the League of Nations as man’s best hope for peace. Since 1945 she has put her hope in the United Nations. (Compare Revelation 17:3, 11.) How extensive is her involvement with this organization?
11 A recent book gives an idea when it states: “No less than twenty-four Catholic organizations are represented at the UN.”
(w91 6/1 p. 17 pars. 9-11 Their Refuge—A Lie!)
“Some may take offense at the frankness of Jehovah’s Witnesses in proclaiming this. However, when they say that Christendom’s religious rulers have taken refuge in a lying arrangement, they merely relate what the Bible says. When they say that Christendom deserves punishment because she has become a part of the world, they merely report what God himself says in the Bible.”
(w91 6/1 p. 18 par. 16 Their Refuge—A Lie!)
Ask them if this article makes it clear that the 24 Catholic NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) constitute part of her spiritual fornication with the UN. Would they then agree that the kings and priests of Revelation 20:4 would have never sanctioned membership in the UN as the Catholic Church did?
If your friends or family waffle at all by showing themselves unwilling to commit to any of these points, you might consider terminating the discussion. If they are already in denial before you’ve even made your point, it doesn’t bode well for the outcome. It’s not easy to know if you are casting your pearls before swine who will trample them and then turn on you, so use your best discretion.
On the other hand, if they are still with you, they may indeed be showing a love for truth. So the next step would be to get them to a computer and have them google the following (sans quotes): “watchtower UN”.
The first returned link is likely to be this one to the UN FAQ site. It is important to tell your listeners that this is not an apostate web site. This is an official page on the United Nations web site.
Under Links & Files, the third link is DPI letter re Watchtower relations 2004.
Get them to read the entire letter. This is important, so there’s no need to rush.
Notice that the application was made in 1991, the same year the June 1, 1991 Watchtower condemned the Catholic Church for having 24 NGOs or non-governmental organizations in the United Nations. One hopes that the hypocrisy evident in this timing does not escape their notice.
Often, the first question they will ask after reading the letter is why would the Organization join the UN in the first place.
The “why” isn’t really important. It’s like asking why a man committed adultery. The fact is, he did and that’s the problem. There can be no excuse that justifies the sin. So instead of answering their question, ask one of your own: “Is there any reason that would justify joining and supporting the image of the wild beast?”
Remember that part of the criteria for becoming an UN NGO is:
- have a demonstrated interest in United Nations issues and a proven ability to reach large or specialized audiences, such as educators, media representatives, policy makers and the business community;
- have the commitment and means to conduct effective information programmes about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets, organizing conferences, seminars and round tables; and enlisting the cooperation of the media.
If they say, “Well, maybe it was just a mistake”, you can say that the Governing Body does not accept that this was a mistake. They’ve never apologized for it, nor admitted they did anything wrong. We cannot call it a mistake if the Governing Body refuses to do so. Besides, would a wife upon learning her husband had a 10-year affair with another women accept the excuse, “It was just a mistake, dear”?
So the facts are that they willingly maintained a full 10-year membership in the United Nations as an NGO, the highest form of membership outside of being a nation-state member. They renewed it annually according to UN requirements. They had to sign an annual submission form. The rules for joining did not change prior to nor after the term of their 10-year membership. They renounced their membership only after an article in the U.K. newspaper, The Guardian, exposed it to the world.
Can any reason justify breaking their neutrality, and compromising the requirement to be separate from the world and its affairs, as detailed in chapter 15 of What Can the Bible Teach Us? and chapter 14 of The Truth that Leads to Eternal Life?
Here is the reason they have given for this transgression:
They claim in this letter that they joined the United Nations—the image of the wild beast—so as to gain access to its research library. That turns out to be untrue since citizens and organizations have always been able to gain access to the library by submitting a request. There never has been a requirement that limits library access only to UN members. However, even if that were the case, would that justify what the organization considers a sin worthy of disfellowshipping? Notice this excerpt from the current elders manual: Shepherd the Flock of God.
3. Actions that may indicate disassociation [disfellowshipping by another name] include the following:
Taking a course contrary to the neutral position of the Christian congregation. (Isa. 2:4; John 15:17-19; w99 11/1 pp. 28-29) If he joins a nonneutral organization, he has disassociated himself.
By its own rulebook, the Governing Body has disassociated itself from the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses by joining a nonneutral organization. Admittedly, they don’t come any more nonneutral than the Organization of the United Nations, the image of the wild beast of Revelation.
True, they are no longer members, but they’ve never apologized, repented, or even admitted that this was a mistake. When they were caught with their hand in the cookie jar, they excused themselves by lying about it, claiming they needed it for library access—which they didn’t—and claiming they quit membership because the requirements had changed—which they hadn’t.
I had one old friend challenge me on the issue of ‘lack of repentance.’ His claim was that we cannot know if they repented. He felt that they did not owe us an apology, and so didn’t have to engage in some sort of public chest-beating display of repentance. They could have privately asked God for forgiveness for all we know, he reasoned.
There are two arguments that prove this line of reasoning is not valid. One is that in the case of a public instructor who has long taught his disciples to avoid a particular course of action, when caught committing the very offence he has denounced, has a responsibility to apologize to those he might otherwise mislead by his actions. If no apology is evident, they might think that his actions speak louder than his words and imitate him by engaging in the same wrong conduct themselves.
The other reason that my friend’s argument is not valid is the fact that the Governing Body publicly excused the action. ‘They joined to access the library (a falsehood) and withdrew membership when the rules for membership were changed (another falsehood).’ One cannot repent unless one has sinned. If they do not acknowledge sin, they have nothing to repent for, do they? So there could not have been any behind-closed-doors repentance.
The full story with all the documented evidence on the Watchtower UN scandal is to be found here.
Of course, if you point your family or friends to that site, they’ll likely cry ‘apostasy.’ If so, then ask them what are they afraid of? Learning the truth, or being deceived? If the latter, then ask them if they think that they, after all the training they get every week at the meetings, are incapable of distinguishing between truth and fiction? Then ask them if a brother were to compromise his neutrality and join a political organization, would you not consider him an apostate? And if that apostate told you not to go to a web site that might prove his guilt, would you be afraid to go?
A lover of truth will be appalled by the hypocrisy and duplicity of this scandal. The lack of any repentance nor acknowledgement of wrongdoing is quite damning, as are the weak attempts to do damage control.
This episode proves the Organization has failed to meet one of the six requirements for a religion to be considered true and approved by God. It’s not enough that they are no longer members. Until a sin is acknowledged before God and men and until sincere repentance has been demonstrated, it remains on the books.
According to Witness teaching, a religion must meet all six requirements. A perfect score is required to get God’s approval. So even if the other five criteria have been met, JW.org still loses due to this one abysmal, inexplicably stupid transgression. Seriously, one can’t help wonder at what they were hoping to achieve.
Unfortunately, for the majority of Witnesses, this will not be a major event at all. Most will enter a state of denial at this revelation. They will excuse it away with the words, “Well, they’re just imperfect men. We all make mistakes.” If so-called Christians are willing to excuse a 10-year compromise of Christian neutrality as a simple mistake despite the words of Revelation 20:4, they clearly don’t know or care what the word means.
Show me the next article in this series.
[…] https://beroeans.net/2017/03/04/identifying-the-true-religion-neutrality/ ↑ […]
[…] https://beroeans.net/2017/03/04/identifying-the-true-religion-neutrality/ ↑ […]
[…] https://beroeans.net/2017/03/04/identifying-the-true-religion-neutrality/ ↑ […]
I understand this article is about reasoning with others that the Organization was not neutral in aligning itself with the U.N. Does this also imply that Christians in general should not get involved in politics if we’re calling out the Organization for doing so? Given the climate over several weeks with regards to police brutality, protests, etc., I wonder why it would be wrong to voice an opinion about injustice and collaborate with those seeking reforms. Of course, no political sytem will be perfect, and no reforms will make everything right/make everyone happy, but as long as we have to… Read more »
Christian neutrality is not the issue here. Hypocrisy is. The issue of Christians being no part of the world is a matter of conscience to a large degree, not entirely, but to a large degree. However, the issue here is we have a group of men who take a very clear stand and who will punish anyone for violating their position on neutrality. Yet, they violate their own rules with impunity. Whether their position on political neutrality is biblical or not is a side point. It is their hypocrisy that condemns them.
I understand Christian neutrality is not the issue in this article, which is why I began my comment with a statement to that effect. I guess this is a site just to refute JW reasoning & beliefs only, not to have a Biblical discussion about issues that affect us as Christians and ex-JWs.
I guess we have both jumped to a wrong conclusion. Sorry.
Hmm….I didn’t jump to any conclusions. I have been perusing this site for a few weeks, and as much as this website is about refuting JW teachings, I find it equally important to help those that have left the JW religion through conversations/topics such as the one I posed in my comment. Non-JW sites I’ve visited are all about bashing JW teachings, and I haven’t found one yet to help ex-JWs reason on the scriptures when it comes to things we were told we shouldn’t do as JWs. I know I can read the Bible for myself and make a… Read more »
[…] prostitute can be identified by reading and examining the proof supplied in the following article Identifying the True Religion – Neutrality on this […]
The points made on the UN membership are well made and pertinent,I would like to add a bit to the so called neutrality issue. On the world stage at the moment is a strong and visible push to blur the distinctions between men and women,there are even those that argue that male and female are nothing more than social constructs,and that there is no difference between the sexes.This is reflected in the amount of people who are transsexual,or just generally confused as to what gender they are. This is been done to “equalise” everyone,make them all the same. Now your… Read more »
[…] sacred precepts—separation from the World and its beast-like political entities—by becoming a secret member of the United Nations for 10 years until they were discovered? Are we proud that the stigma of […]
[…] have been a number of thought provoking comments on the previous article in this series. I’d like to address some of the points raised there. In addition, I […]
Yes Robert, the bulge is now so big, the carpet doesn’t cover all the garbage anymore. It’s visible as it leaks out around the edges. Yes Menrov. Your point is what I was trying to get at. That’s why I said that it was the Witnesses that put it on the list…with a smile (I wouldn’t have put neutrality on the list). I have often thought of Daniel and his friends. They had the modern day positions of Ministers in Government. The President was a not so good king who destroyed Jerusalem, it’s temple and enslaved God’s people. I can’t… Read more »
Thank you Meleti and all who have contributed to this great topic! These type of discussions give us who are still “in” good scriptural witnessing points when attempting to help our friends and families to wake up! The only way to do this is to be non-threatening and not appearing to be the dreaded apostate that we have all been indoctrinated to believe exist whenever a teaching or doctrine is challenged or proven false for that matter. When we are able to use the Bible and benign sources ( i.e. The Gaurdian or The ARC video) this is very effective… Read more »
I am grateful, Gogetter, that Tadua is now helping out with the CLAM review which frees me up to write other articles such as this current series.
Funny how the WBTS uses their definition of neutrality as a means to distinguish its members from other organisations and at the same time make use of all the secular laws and organisations for their own benefit. To apply for tax exempt status: engage with governments. To apply for exempt from military service: make use of European Human Rights laws or UN related human right laws. To “protect or claim” their rights, the WBTS has no problem to call on secular laws and use their lawyers (paid by donations). But the WBTS is very reluctant to comply with secular laws… Read more »
Spot on, Menrov!
Yup! Is it even possible to be an ‘organisation’ and to be no part of the world at the same time? It is such an awkward paradox. Jesus never registered to be in temple service or to be an official, he had nothing to do with the governments, he exposed the hypocrisy of the scribes and pharisees but was free from hypocrisy himself. What an honour it is to do our best to follow Christ’s footsteps. He really is our perfect teacher and example!
Couldn’t agree more, Candace!
I recall getting an inside scoop on this years ago. During the 90’s, there were a lot of legal battles going on in Greece, eastern Europe, Asia, etc. In many of those countries, the only way to get legal status for the work was to appeal to the UN, stating that the country was not upholding it’s member rules. When a country is a charter member, it is expected to uphold the charter. If for they example, they deny freedom of religion to their citizens, what can the citizens do? The only course is to appeal to the UN, showing… Read more »
Hi, you said: “So, I’m still tossing up whether neutrality is an easily identifiable mark of true Christians”. So-called neutrality (what does this mean??) is not a view or measure found in the scriptures to identify a “true Christian” (what is a true Christian???). Actually, only LOVE is the identifying element for followers of Jesus (not for identifying so-called true Christians). All these so-called criteria are used by religious orgnisations to distinguish themselves from others, to show they are “better”. Jesus never used any criteria in order to see if the person should receive His blessing or be cured by… Read more »
This actually explains alot. None of the other explanations really made that much sense to me. Thanks! 🙂
We can’t emphasize enough the fact that the UN being the ‘wild beast’ is an interpretation. It is not well know, but in Russell’s day, the interpretation was different. He believed the beast that went away and then came back was first the World Court in the Hague, and then the League of Nations that superseded it. Now, they say the League came first, then the UN, and all mention of their prior doctrine about the World Court is swept under the rug with the other ‘old light’. I do believe that ‘rug’ has a big bulge in the middle… Read more »
Hi Yehorakam. Well constructed thoughts. Personally I was not bothered if the GB was a member of the UN for the reasons they stated. What worries me is this is yet another example of truth avoidance, where the existing stance is defended even when it is wrong. Maybe there are some repercussions if they admit they were in the wrong, yet it is what they expect from the R & F.
Excellent summary. You put it so much better than I did with my husband years ago. I’m afraid I didn’t put it nearly so well as you did and alienated him. I’m really looking forward to the rest of the series!
I’ve been talking to a dear longtime friend about the child abuse issues and it’s absolutely amazing the mental gymnastics she will go through to try to justify the actions of the WTS. I love what you said about us being lovers of truth. I am a lover of truth above any organization! It’s sad that most Witnesses aren’t.
In my discussion last night with two dear, longtime friends, I made the point about loving the truth and he got upset with me because I was saying by implication that he didn’t love it. I tried to soften the wording, but he wouldn’t have it, so I told him frankly that if he truly loved truth, he’d be willing to discuss the issues with me using the Bible and if I was wrong, he could show me that himself from the Bible, but the fact was that he was unwilling even to discuss the issues I’d raised, so how… Read more »
You noted, <> and <> Actually, the reason why they could justify this decision (at least in their own minds) is very explicable. By being a UN NGO, it gave them access and credibility to make contacts with government officials around the world, in areas where WT was experiencing restrictions, bans and other problems, in order for them to influence laws and regulations in their favor. That goes far beyond merely “defending the good news”, but ventures into explicit interference with politics for their own benefit. Can we imagine Jesus hobnobbing with the Roman Senate of the first century, trying… Read more »
Welcome, Robert-6512. You make an excellent point which I had not considered before. That makes sense.
In our country, NGO’s get paid to do their work. I wonder how much the UN pays NGO’s, or if the fact that they are recognized by the UN used as leverage to get payments from elsewhere.
When you said “That goes far beyond merely “defending the good news”, but ventures into explicit interference with politics for their own benefit.”
It reminded me of something I read about Rutherford writing to Hitler during the IIWW to say (paraphrase!) that most of Hitler’s beliefs were similar to JWs, so he should cut them some slack. It didn’t work.
I hadn’t really thought of this as being political before, but I guess it is.
Thanks again Meleti! 🙂
There are web sites that contain a translation of the original document (which was in German), and if you have never seen it before, it’s an eye opener. (Or, more likely, a jaw-dropping revelation.) The language used by Rutherford was stunningly anti-Semitic, and the terms he used to ingratiate himself and WT in the eyes of Hitler were shocking. It was a blatant case of Rutherford kissing Hitler’s *** in order to curry favor with a brutal and genocidal dictator. If you read WT’s later explanations of this later, they totally whitewash it – never really quoting from the letter… Read more »
Wow! That is some powerful stuff!
Hi Robert, apart from the German brothers and sisters, Hitler went after all Biblestudents in whole occupied Europe., and Jews and Roman Gypsies.
Love to all those victims who stood firm for their Heavenly Father and his Son. They are all within their memory.
Love to all.
Thank you Meleti . My husband discovered this a few months ago – one of our fellow brothers asked if this was true. I think he was given the link to see article. A sister also got wind of this too and she asked an elder who waffled some excuse about needing access to library. It’s a shame the shutters come down – but you certainly have once again give us thoroughly researched material and help to help honest hearted ones. It’s funny being on the ‘inside’ trying to witness- we cannot save others if not interested and just as… Read more »
I find it interesting that to be a UN NGO, the organization must “have a demonstrated interest in United Nations issues and a proven ability to reach large or specialized audiences” and would have the “means to conduct effective information programmes about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets, organizing conferences, seminars and round tables;” In other words, it appears to be incumbent on the NGO to disseminate UN information by means of publications and conferences (meetings and assemblies). How many of the articles in the Awake deal with UN issues, such as water, pollution, health issues etc? Was… Read more »
Yes, and in particular the articles referenced in the JWfacts link that Meleti posted. You can see very clearly that the writing department were trying to fulfill this obligation to their membership status, while at the same time trying to keep a neutral tone to their JW readers. It was double-tongued and highly deceptive. To me this is the most damning evidence that they knew perfectly well what they were doing. I don’t think the NGO thing in itself is really bad in the big scheme of things. I don’t know why they did it. They didn’t need it for… Read more »
Even while we were ‘good’ unsuspecting JW’s, we were puzzled over the contents of the Awake as some magazines had virtually no biblical content. I have also heard that the org gets very big discounts on convention venues in exchange for putting ‘advertising’ into the Awake to promote the city. An example was an article on Sydney.
Hi Colette – I didn’t know about flying the flag by K Halls in Chile! The plot thickens.
Hello Colette …. Unbelievable that adults should force children to remain silent or seated when their school song or national anthem is played exposing them to all sorts of ridicule and bullying…. All the while the adults of the GB fly their flags, are apart of the UN, bribe politicians to avoid military service (while others pay a deadly price for their stand on neutrality ….Malawi/Mexico double standards)…. Yet another hypocrisy of this Borg (An alien species from Star Trek who assimilate others in order for them to become apart of their perfect collective/organisation)…. How do we become whole again… Read more »
Paul said there would be a resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous. (Acts 24:15) We know that the unrighteous cannot inherit the kingdom of the heavens. (1Co 6:9) Therefore, the unrighteous will be resurrected to the earth. The purpose for the new creation which is the sons of God is to reconcile these unrighteous back into the family of God. (2Co 5:17; Gal 6:15; Ro 8:18-25) I’m working on a article that will bring together the scriptures to better explain this process of human salvation. Unfortunately, I have to deal with some serious health issues first. Life is so… Read more »
Hi Karen. Always remember the Lord’s Prayer “Your Kingdom come. Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” Mt 6:10. Jesus taught us to pray for this and it will happen. Our role as children of God may be different than we were taught as JW ‘s but we will still enjoy and be part of the restoration.
Thank you for your clear explanation on this I was never aware of whist being a JW. Not ever heard they were part as NGO of the UN, not even a whisper.
To have zeal for truth no matter what, will pull one through all that will be exposed. Have to learn still to season my words. When you heart burns it’s difficult to apply.
Love to all seekers of truth.
Hello Willy thank you, your comment sums up my thoughts perfectly! ‘Our discussions should never become a contest of wills, but rather a cooperative search for truth.’ – this is so hard to apply and I haven’t been able to do it very well. So ashamed to think how much I treasured the ‘practical’ articles in the Awake only to now find out they could all be to comply with UN requirements. So hypocritical. Of course there is zero chance I can even bring this subject up with any of my loved ones because they will just say I am… Read more »
Hi Meleti. I very much appreciated your presentation of the UN-NGO fiasco of the WT Society. It very clearly lays out the facts in logical order–for anyone interested in “truth” it is an undeniable fact that the WT Society/JW.0rg has proven itself a transgressor of its own organizational laws, and so exposing itself as fraught with human frailty and lack of Divine basis. They’ve set up their commands of men and are not able to meet their own requirements. (Matthew 23:4, 13) “They bind up heavy loads and put them on the shoulders of men, but they themselves are not… Read more »
Yes, amazing how the words of our Lord continue to have force down to the present day. Truly he spoke with divine inspiration.
[…] our next article, we will deal with the first criterion: True worshippers are separate from the world and its […]
Very well said, Meleti, Well spoken, Meleti, “With so much stacked against us, let us do our best to reach hearts by speaking kindly and respectfully; by not pushing our newfound understandings on unreceptive ears; and by always endeavoring to find the right questions to help our loved ones to think and reason for themselves. Our discussions should never become a contest of wills, but rather a cooperative search for truth.” I go to churches now to try to tactfully teach truth to any who will listen. The very first and biggest issue is …you know….Trinity. A very hard nut… Read more »
Your remark above touches on the Trinity, a topic that seems to never end. To me, one of the biggest sticking points is John 1:1. From what I have gathered, no reputable scholar (who really is one) believes the verse says “a god” but should be “the word was God”. I believe they are correct. Yet in spite of that, I am convinced the Trinity is false, because it makes no sense. We are told in 1 Corinthians that Jesus died and was resurrected, and if we don’t believe that are faith is in vain. But, if Jesus is God,… Read more »
I am amazed at that way of looking at it. I will be having a discussion with a fleshly brother who believes the trinity. I need just what you have explained! That reasoning on John 1:1 – well.. I think you have cracked it. Simply brilliant. Thanks.
There is a paper I wrote that explains this in more detail (Microsoft word). If you could provide an email address, I can send you a copy.
Hi Robert Can you get my email address from Meleti and send it to me too please?
Hello bros. and sisters, isn’t this an important discussion? Jesus’ role/place in the heavens above? Apostle John was the favorite, as stated in scripture. And we see he was favored with very important revelations. This is certainly apparent from reading John chapter 1. According to Phillips NT in Modern English, “In the beginning, God expressed himself.” Now, Jesus also taught us that he is the very essence of God’s knowledge, and doesn’t that make sense? If God was to start creating, wouldn’t he create someone who would be a suitable companion for himself? Someone he could love, admire, …even stimulate… Read more »
Yes, I agree. Something twigged here when you said “If God was to start creating, wouldn’t he create someone who would be a suitable companion for himself? Someone he could love, admire, …even stimulate his creativity and bring him great joy..”. A previous commenter said Jesus is in a class of his own. I’m going to ponder this thought – I feel very comfortable with it. Thanks.
There is an interesting debate on youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xVkKkpo-lk&t=4226s
Trinity vs Unitarian. The argument to uphold the deity of Christ seems very sound and scriptural. Except of course that they get the last bit wrong. Jesus is not his Father. But he is a God.
Hi Robert. I am very interested in this topic as well, if possible could you get my email address from Meleti an send that paper? Thx!
I received it. Looking forward to reading it. Thanks!
I’ve asked Meleti to give you my email, or also… maybe you could make it a topic on DDT, It would be valuable to hear some other comments.
I asked Meleti to send it to you, it should be in your email inbox by now. You have my permission to put this on DTT if you wish, but I don’t involve myself in that site.
(p.s. DTT is the web site; DDT is a bug spray :-))
Yes, received it thanks.. came through virus and bug free.
I’m dissecting it now!
Hi Robert. Not sure if your prefer Robert or 6512. 🙂 I’m happy for the insight you have contributed to this forum. My way of seeing things has been very similar. When humans were orphaned from God due to sin, God did not refuse to help them. In his love, he wanted to help them, but being holy, he would not have direct dealings with them. God’s way of dealing, or better said “helping them” was always by transmitting his words through perfect angelic representatives. His perfect representatives could be referred to as Jehovah, God or Lord, and that was… Read more »
Meleti has the document. Anyone who wishes a copy has my permission to ask him directly to email it.
Hi Yehorakam, I must beg to differ with you in your understanding of Jesus’ role prior to his birth. These Scriptures seem to indicate that Jehovah did not use his firstborn as you suggest. “. . .For if the word spoken through angels proved to be firm, and every transgression and disobedient act received a retribution in harmony with justice; 3 how shall we escape if we have neglected a salvation of such greatness in that it began to be spoken through [our] Lord and was verified for us by those who heard him, 4 while God joined in bearing witness with signs as… Read more »
You make a good point. The scriptures do say that God’s word was transmitted through angels. What is an angel? Some would like to say that it only means messenger. Angel does not just refer to a messengers, but to ALL spirit sons of God. I believe Jesus fits that description and is an angel, a spirit son of God even as they are. They were called his companions before his being anointed to a superior position. (Heb 1:9). Phil 2:8-10, Heb 1:3,4 and 1 Pet 3:22 indicate that after coming to earth, he was given a position above the… Read more »
I have a number of problems with your position, Yehorakam, but rather than get into them now, I refer back to my previous comment which referred to Heb 2:2-4 as evidence that he could not have been an angel. If he were an angel, then Hebrews makes no sense since the purpose of the passage is to contrast the word spoken by angels versus that spoken by our Lord. If he is merely an angel, then this passage makes no sense.
Hi Meleti, Personally, I’m undecided on this issue. Yet, I’m not sure the NT gives us a way to be completely dismissive of an angelomorphic Christology. For instance, it’s possible that the prologue of Hebrews was written to address a particular Hebraic concern of the Jews at that time, namely the source and sanction of OT canon and prophecy (Heb. 1:1; 2:2f). In esteeming the revealing of Christ as something even greater than these, the author of Hebrews addresses precisely why Christ has become better than the angels; and the subsequent appeal is not ontological, but rather functional (Heb. 1:4).… Read more »
Another thought is that the fact that Jesus was appointed over the angels, doesn’t mean he was one of them and was “promoted from within”. His role as the word of God was unique. However, it didn’t include authority over the angels as they answered directly to God as the account of Job indicates. Only after he was tested could he be appointed to that authority. HOwever, not having that authority before he became the Son of Man doesn’t mean he was an angel.
I believe Jesus was in a class by himself.
Hi Yehorakam, I always believed that Jesus was Michael the archangel too. However, recently discovered a thought in Dan. 10:13 that seems to indicate otherwise. It says Michael was one of the Chief princes. Are there any other angels with the same rank as Jesus? He is unique , as God’s only begotten son and not like one of any other of the angels. So, that’s why I don’t believe Michael is Jesus. That was a new thought for me and I just wanted to share it.?