Debunking false claims about Jehovah's Witnesses. 1-14

reply to post by Bigwhammy

Why years? These are 2,300 evenings/mornings, which refers to 2,300 total units or days. DAYS not years.

That comes from the experience of Israelites rebelling in the wilderness.
For each day of rebellion, they were to stay in the wilderness for a year.
We are not the only people who use this day for a year principle. It is used in a widespread fashion for a lot of prophecy interpretation.
The JW version is exactly word for word what the Seventh Day Adventists used to promote to point out how close the end is. The only difference is their addition of the 70, for whatever reason. I guess just to be different and grab up any disaffected Adventists who actually wanted more date making.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Oh I know in some cases days and years can be interchanged but this obviously doesn't qualify. No one switches out years for days when it clearly says evening/morning and everyone already knows that the the prophecy was fulfilled so its a mute point anyway. How silly of both.

And how arbitrarily they just add 70 years? And actually they don't even agree with themselves because he president (Rutherford) said in 1929.

* "The scriptural proof is that the second presence of the Lord Jesus Christ began in 1874 A.D."

But you say 1844 - so we have 3 dates - all from "prophets"

"And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray." (Mt 24:10-11)

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

Straw man much? He never said:

an ordinary physical body

I addressed your unscritptural assault on Biblical Christianity here

Are you serious? So, what did he say? That was what I got from it. OK, then define a "glorified body". Is that in the Bible?
What kind of body does an angel have?
Where does it say we go to heaven in physical bodies?
Did John have a physical body when he went to heaven "in the spirit"?
JW's actually believe that Jesus was in the flesh and lived as a man. After that life that anyone would have, that does not remain a factor, as far as what John was calling the antichrist.




[edit on 19-6-2009 by jmdewey60]

Originally posted by dthwraith
Wow great vids, learned alot from the letter vid. All this is very interesting.

dthwraith, Dr. Walter Martin was the Bible Answer Man with the Christian Research Institute. He wrote the Kingdom of the Cults, slamming the jw's and mormons and others. He has since passed on with the Lord.
You can visit his site that his daughter put up here:
waltermartin.com...
They even have a forum which is here: www.waltermartin.com...

Walter was a great man of God and he did a great job teaching everyone about the false doctrines of the cults.

Thanks,
TT

reply to post by Bigwhammy

And how arbitrarily they just add 70 years? And actually they don't even agree with themselves because he president (Rutherford) said in 1929.
* "The scriptural proof is that the second presence of the Lord Jesus Christ began in 1874 A.D."
But you say 1844 - so we have 3 dates - all from "prophets"

That has to be something else and can not say where 1874 comes from.
I did sit down and compare the versions 27 years ago and they do have the 2300 days coming out the same. Apparently they added other time periods and they are not legitimate to me.
What we believe is that way back in the other century Jesus began the work of judging the dead. It represents a principle that Jesus actually goes through it as if it is real and the Judgment is not just some funny little analogy that never really happens.



[edit on 19-6-2009 by jmdewey60]

reply to post by jmdewey60


So obviously your group has false prophets. That's the problem with cults they just make stuff up out of thin air as they go along and disregard the Bible. The Bible clearly teaches when Jesus will judge the dead and it was not in 1844!

" Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done." (Re 20:11-13)

This is at the end of the literal earthly space time millennial reign. So 1844 is ludicrous. Might should check the punishment for false prophets in Deuteronomy 13:5.

Why not join a real church and leave this nonsense?



[edit on 6/19/2009 by Bigwhammy]

reply to post by Bigwhammy

The Bible clearly teaches when Jesus will judge the dead and it was not in 1844!

Oh no no no no!
That is the judgment of the dead from the second resurrection that is unto shame.
The ones who are judged now are the ones who belong to Jesus and will be in the first resurrection.
Otherwise how do they get resurrected and go into heaven to be with Jesus, in the first place?

reply to post by Bigwhammy

Why not join a real church and leave this nonsense?

It is a real church and it is not nonsense.
How many churches teach that the end of the world is coming?
Probably a lot.
Well guess what. Back in the day, the SDA was the only church that did and people thought they were strange. It is not so strange now, is it?
What do you think is a real church? one that says we just keep on going without end, or an end that is so far off that we need never consider it?
People are going to wake up and not sometime in the future but right now to the fact that the beast is upon us and when you line up to receive your mark you might just wish you would have listened to what this "cult" had to say.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Originally posted by jmdewey60
The ones who are judged now are the ones who belong to Jesus and will be in the first resurrection.
Otherwise how do they get resurrected and go into heaven to be with Jesus, in the first place?

Their spirits go to heaven instantly! Jesus said to the thief on the cross.

"And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”" (Lk 23:43)

Today (33 AD) - not in 1844.

There bodies are resurrected at the rapture. Whether is pre mid or post trib is inconsequential to this debate.

"For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord." (1 Th 4:16-17)

So your position is that the rapture occurred in 1844? Oh I doubt it... those false prophets just made that bit up as a cover when their date setting failed because they mangled Daniels prophecy. :shk:

I really hope you will try a Calvary Chapel or a Southern Baptist church and leave that cult stuff alone.

reply to post by Bigwhammy
Woah! That sounds like a cult to me. seriously, that is way off that I can not imagine anyone would actually say that.
Man, you need to get out your Bible and stop listening to that sort of stuff.
OK, there is a box full of souls in heaven but they are dead, sorry about that.

reply to post by Bigwhammy

So your position is that the rapture occurred in 1844? Oh I doubt it... those false prophets just made that bit up as a cover when their date setting failed because they mangled Daniels prophecy.

No, there was no rapture. That was what people expected. This man Miller went around New England teaching people about this date he came up with. A lot of people got caught up in what was almost a hysteria. It was not all that popular because all the churches fought against it. After the "great disappointment" certain people gathered at meetings and decided even though the date did not turn out as advertised, they felt it was an important thing to have a frame of mind of constantly being expecting Jesus' return "as a thief in the night".
The "High Priest in the Most Holy Place" started then and was gradually developed on. It is a lesson to study the old tabernacle and its services as a model of heaven and Christ's work. As far as a doctrine it is limited to the concept of an "investigative judgment".


[edit on 19-6-2009 by jmdewey60]

reply to post by Bigwhammy

I really hope you will try a Calvary Chapel or a Southern Baptist church and leave that cult stuff alone.

It just so happens that I think Calvary Chapel is a cult.

reply to post by jmdewey60

After the "great disappointment" certain people gathered at meetings and decided even though the date did not turn out as advertised,

even better leave the cult and join the Christian church....

From what I've seen Calvary Chaple makes an effort to follow the Bible, they don't date set and make up crazy false doctrines about Jesus in 1844 :shk:

I like to listen to the pastor Chuck Smith and I like Chuck Missler's Bible studies. However I'm in the SBC.

Why do you call CC a cult?



[edit on 6/19/2009 by Bigwhammy]

Hmmm I see now you base your theology on the ramblings of a woman who was hit in the head with a rock.... no wonder. It all makes sense now. Please leave that mess and join a Christian church that follows the Bible - not the "visions" of brain injured people.

reply to post by Bigwhammy

even better leave the cult and join the Christian church....
From what I've seen Calvary Chaple makes an effort to follow the Bible, they don't date set and make up crazy false doctrines about Jesus in 1844
I like to listen to the pastor Chuck Smith and I like Chuck Missler's Bible studies. However I'm in the SBC.
Why do you call CC a cult?

The SDA's never set any dates. That was that guy Miller. The church came about later, after the fact. It is just that the original members were people who did not feel comfortable staying in churches that were full of ridicule over the very idea that Jesus was ever coming back in the next thousand years or something.
I am originally from southern California and CC was real big in my area. This was like back in the early eighties. There was a lot of talk about them being cultish but I do not really remember the specifics.
I think any Southern Baptist would feel right at home in a SDA church and it is not at all as weird as you might imagine. I wish it was and I remember when I was a kid when we were more like the good old JW's with no stinking Christmas trees or crosses or easter.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Why did you say Christ was supposed to return in 1844. But he didn't so you decided it must mean he "returned secretly" to judge the dead :shk: - which I debunked with scripture - and now your saying you guys don't set dates? Its like you defend it until debunked and now your distancing yourself... which you should.

completely

You called CC a cult but have no reason or evidence for saying it? That's just gossip - not good. I'm not just criticizing it for no reason, there's a lot of evidence against 7th day. I think this whole Ellen White business is petty strong evidence that some of you guys are off in left field.

The video description from you tube.

It explores the origins and teachings of the sect and examines the claims of the founder and self-appointed prophet, Mrs. Ellen G. White, comparing her unique beliefs with the Bible. You will meet a number of former high-ranking church leaders, many of them fourth generation Adventists, and discover what happened when they embarked on a journey to discover the truth about Mrs. White, the doctrine of the "investigative judgment" and numerous other teachings held by the movement. You will be shocked by what they found.

"Those who may agree or for those who strongly disagree, viewers of this documentary will find it a most fascinating exploration into the cultic aspects of the teachings of Ellen G. White. I heartily recommended it for Christians who seek genuine answers based on the best scholarship and firm adherence to the truths of God's Word." Dr. James Kennedy, Senior Pastor Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, Fort Lauderdale, FL

I believe you can still be saved and yet be wrapped up in bad doctrines and cultism, but I would think the Holy Spirit would be sending you signs - hint - to leave.

reply to post by Bigwhammy

Why did you say Christ was supposed to return in 1844. But he didn't so you decided it must mean he "returned secretly" to judge the dead - which I debunked with scripture - and now your saying you guys don't set dates? Its like you defend it until debunked and now your distancing yourself... which you should.

I said Jesus ruled from a remote location. When I said rule, I meant as High Priest.
I said Miller said so. That was a long time before there was a such thing as an SDA church. A lot of the early members of the church were people who had been awakened by the call of Christ's soon coming, that they first heard from Miller. After the whole 1844 thing blew over people realized that there was a better explanation for what may have really happened in 1844.
I am not distancing myself. You just did not understand what I meant. The story is a little difficult if you have never heard it before. I think people imagine the idea of Christ's soon coming is something that has always been around but it was not.

reply to post by Bigwhammy

It explores the origins and teachings of the sect and examines the claims of the founder and self-appointed prophet, Mrs. Ellen G. White, comparing her unique beliefs with the Bible.

I am a fourth generation SDA and I can tell you this is either not true or highly biased.
Anytime you have some high profile person who is involved in something that gets big, you have a lot of mythology that develops.
E.G.White did not found the church and did not declare herself to be a prophet. She was a sick person who may have been epileptic who had visions. She had a female secretary who did the physical writing of books. Nothing she claimed was out of line from what was the current understanding of her day. The church was way ahead of its time medically as far as understanding that what you ate had an influence on your health. They pretty much built their reputation by setting up what was called back then sanitariums, which were really what we would call today health spas.


[edit on 20-6-2009 by jmdewey60]

reply to post by jmdewey60


Well I think he is coming soon too - at anytime. Jesus didn't seem very concerned about diets.

"There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.”" (Mk 7:15)

I hope that what your church teaches is pleasing God more than improving your diet. I only know what I've seen and read and I think its highly suspect but I wish you well. I encourage you to be like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 and search the scriptures to see if what they say is true. God bless.

reply to post by Bigwhammy

I think its highly suspect but I wish you well.

You have no idea how bad people's diets were back then and people lived on white bread and pork.
I know all the stories and do not worry about it. It is a bunch of hero worship that was around back in the 60's that caused a lot of problems but people are not stupid and have moved on past any foolishness.