Thursday, 11 November 2010

StandFirm Proves that Jehovah's Witnesses "stand condemned"

I've pointed out that Jehovah's Witnesses preach a different gospel from that of the 1st century, and therefore stand condemned, per Galatians 1:8.

StandFirm has kindly affirmed my position:
What Galatians 1:8 and other such scriptures are speaking about is the overall message that someone might be preaching. If an individual's or group's overall message is different than the one the Christians of the 1st century preached, then they fall under that condemnation.
 2 Cor 5 details what the 1st century gospel message was about:

18 But all things are from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of the reconciliation, 19 namely, that God was by means of Christ reconciling a world to himself, not reckoning to them their trespasses, and he committed the word of the reconciliation to us.
20 We are therefore ambassadors substituting for Christ, as though God were making entreaty through us. As substitutes for Christ we beg: “Become reconciled to God.” 21 The one who did not know sin he made to be sin for us, that we might become God’s righteousness by means of him.
Jehovah's Witnesses are trained, by the Governing Body (the group of men based in North America who claim, without corroborative evidence, to be God's spokesgroup), to preach a different gospel. And they don't even try and hide it:
"Let the honest-hearted person compare the kind of preaching of the gospel of the Kingdom done by the religious systems of Christendom during all the centuries with that done by Jehovah's Witnesses since the end of World War 1 in 1918. They are not one and the same kind. That of Jehovah's Witnesses is really the "gospel" or "good news," as of God's heavenly kingdom that was established by the enthronement of his Son Jesus Christ at the end of the Gentile Times in 1914." Watchtower May 1st 1981 page 17
Where in the 1st century gospel was any mention of 1914?

Therefore, per StandFirm's assertion, the Witness' overall  message is different from the message preached Paul, for example.

at 09:00
Labels: , , , ,

5 comments:

  1. Mike Felker11 November 2010 at 19:43

    Ouch! That was quite the deathblow brother!

    ReplyDelete
  2. StandFirm12 November 2010 at 04:32

    "Where in the 1st century gospel was any mention of 1914?"

    Nowhere. The early Christians did not believe in 1914. They had no idea about 1914.

    They didn't have either the Julian or Gregorian calendars. So they had no idea about 1914, BCE/BC and CE/AD, or of a '1st century'.

    Did they believe in a future coming of Christ? What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mark Hunter12 November 2010 at 08:03

    If they had no idea about 1914, then why do Jehovah's Witnesses make it a part of the gospel they preach?

    The rest of stuff about calendars is a pile of nonsense and is completely unrelated to the Governing Body giving you a different gospel to preach. While they were anticipating Christ's return, they knew not to set dates.

    Acts 1: 7 He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mike Felker12 November 2010 at 12:20

    (NASB) Acts 1:11 They also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven."

    Regardless of what you think about the manner and nature of this returning, it was something that the disciples clearly knew about. And per the verse quoted by Mark, they had no clue about a date and every reason for not assigning a date to the coming.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mark Hunter5 December 2010 at 07:38

    StandFirm, didn't you once say that Christians in the 21st C shouldn't believe things that Christians in the 1st C didn't believe? I'm sure it was in relation to worshipping Jesus.

    Anyway, now you're saying;
    "The early Christians did not believe in 1914. They had no idea about 1914."

    Do you believe in 1914? If so, why?

    Is it simply because the Governing Body expects you to do so without holding any suspicion or doubt (or contrary beliefs) to them, per your own published statement?

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)