Suppose I had access to everything you had done or said since you were a little child, stored on a computer. It would be a simple matter for me to pick out a hundred or two hundred of the worst things you’d said and done over the course of your life, to write them up in a list with dates, times and places and then to proclaim, in the same way as a correspondent did in one of his emails to me: “The question is not what you have got wrong, but whether you got anything right.” On the other hand, by a similar process of selecting the 100-200 kindest, most generous, loving things you’d done, I could equally make you look like a saint. Both pictures would be true in a sense, but neither would be the whole truth. Why is this important?
The WatchtowerIn the last 125 years, Jehovah’s Witnesses have published literally millions of words in publications such as The Watchtower. This includes powerful arguments against atheism and the theory of evolution, eloquent defences of the Bible as the inspired word of God, articles upholding the Bible’s stance on moral issues such as abortion, fornication, adultery and homosexual lifestyles. Watchtower publications have long exhorted their readers to display Christian qualities and imitate Jesus. They have shown how applying the Bible’s counsel can benefit family life. Through The Watchtower, millions of people have been comforted by the Bible’s message of hope.
You might expect that evangelical Christian organizations would happily applaud most of the above. After all, evangelical Christians believe in God and reject evolution, consider the Bible to be God’s inspired word, oppose sexual sins and abortion. They, too, speak of the need to imitate Jesus and display Christlike qualities. You would expect, then, that evangelical Christian groups could find a lot of positive things to say about The Watchtower. You’d think they’d congratulate Jehovah’s Witnesses for energetically spreading the above-mentioned views throughout the world and in literally hundreds of languages. But you would be wildly wrong.
An analysis of quotations from The Watchtower and other Jehovah’s Witness publications made by evangelical Christian writers - particularly on the Internet, but also in print - reveals that, far from commending Witness literature for all the positive material they publish, these writers consistently attack Jehovah’s Witnesses and actively seek anything that could possibly be used to discredit them - including many things published more than 100 years ago!
You could compare their attitude with that of a man who visits one of the world’s most beautiful cities - say Vienna. Instead of touring the most attractive parts of the city, though, this man visits the Municipal Garbage Dump and photographs the rubbish there. Then he goes to the industrial area and photographs the factories. Everywhere he goes he looks for the ugliest, most sordid parts of the city. Making copious use of close-ups to highlight the least attractive parts and using the most unflattering camera angles, he ensures his pictures give the worst possible impression. Then, on his return home, he shows the photographs to his friends, to convince them that Vienna is the most awful city in the world.
In resorting to similar tactics, critics of Witness publications immediately reveal their bias. The Watchtower Society is their ideological opponent, to be defeated at all costs. They comb through old Watchtowers, going back as far as 130 years. They take whatever suits their purpose and ignore the rest. They rip quotes out of their context, attempting to make it look as though they say much more than they actually meant. Why do they do it? They do it because it is their job to do it! In short, they are far from being an objective source of information.
Frankly, few Jehovah's Witnesses are likely to be taken in by such chicanery. It is easy to detect an agenda behind this type of mudslinging. Just about anyone who wanted to believe it has already done so. And as for the rest of us, what hasn't killed us has made us stronger.
But we should not reject a person’s criticism simply because we feel it is wrongly motivated. Prejudiced and hate-filled people can sometimes be at least partially right. As Christians, we should be discerning, remembering the admonition of the proverb, “anyone inexperienced puts faith in every word.” (Proverbs 14:15) With that in mind, let us examine the assertions commonly made in anti-Witness literature concerning the Witnesses’ alleged “false prophecies”.
Taken Out of Context
We have not the gift of prophecy
Zion's Watch Tower, July 1883.
The standard technique of critics appears to be to present a list of alleged “false prophecies”, the longer the better. There are dozens of such lists on the Internet. These take the form of quotations from The Watchtower and other Witness publications.
Whereas the majority of the quotes themselves are accurate, the context in which they were presented - both the immediate context of the printed page and the historical context - is omitted. Selective quotations ensure that anything that gives the impression of certainty is usually included, whereas any cautionary statements are omitted.We are not for a moment denying that the publications - in particular the earlier ones - have at times published information that was speculative in nature and turned out to be mistaken. But the fact is that, for each of the dates commonly touted by critics as ‘false prophecies’ (1874, 1914, 1925, 1975), Watch Tower publications had published cautionary statements to the effect that it was by no means certain what would happen. Consider, for example, the following statements, which emphasise that the basis for the conclusions was Bible study not some message from God:[1]
With regard to 1874: It should be noted that ‘The Watchtower’ was not published until 1879 and Russell himself did not become aware of the 1874 date until 1876! So it was hardly a matter of a failed prediction.
With regard to 1914: : "We are not prqophesying; we are merely giving our surmises . . . We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology. We have merely laid these before you, leaving it for each to exercise his own faith or doubt in respect to them" (emphasis added).[2]
With regard to 1925: "The year 1925 is here. With great expectation Christians have looked forward to this year. Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be. In his own due time God will accomplish his purposes concerning his people. Christians should not be so deeply concerned about what may transpire this year."[3]
With regard to 1975: ‘What about the year 1975? What is it going to mean, dear friends?’ asked Brother Franz. ‘Does it mean that Armageddon is going to be finished, with Satan bound, by 1975? It could! It could! All things are possible with God. Does it mean that Babylon the Great is going to go down by 1975? It could. Does it mean that the attack of Gog of Magog is going to be made on Jehovah’s witnesses to wipe them out, then Gog himself will be put out of action? It could. But we are not saying. All things are possible with God. But we are not saying. And don’t any of you be specific in saying anything that is going to happen between now and 1975.[4]
Charles Taze RussellIt’s obvious, therefore, that the situation was by no means as clear-cut as Watchtower opposers would have us believe. By omitting these more cautionary statements, many of which are in the same articles as the quotations they like to print, enemies of Jehovah’s Witnesses give a misleading picture of events and endeavour to make a suggested interpretation look like a prophecy.
No Claim of Inspiration
Not to be overlooked is the larger context of the role of the Watch Tower publications. Whereas Watchtower writers undoubtedly pray for God’s blessing on their work and sincerely believe that God answers these prayers, they make no pretensions of being inspired, infallible or perfect. Consider the following extracts from Watch Tower publications, which prove that this is the case. (This is just a small selection of examples. Many more could be cited, but care has been taken to include at least one example for every decade since The Watchtower began to be published.)
1870s: We do not object to changing our opinions on any subject, or discarding former applications of prophecy, or any other scripture, when we see a good reason for the change,—in fact, it is important that we should be willing to unlearn errors and mere traditions, as to learn truth.... It is our duty to "prove all things."—by the unerring Word,—"and hold fast to that which is good."
1880s: “We have not the gift of prophecy.”[5]
We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology.Zion's Watch Tower, 1908
1890s: Nor would we have our writings reverenced or regarded as infallible, or on a par with the holy Scriptures. The most we claim or have ever claimed for our teachings is that they are what we believe to be harmonious interpretations of the divine Word, in harmony with the spirit of the truth. And we still urge, as in the past, that each reader study the subjects we present in the light of the Scriptures, proving all things by the Scriptures, accepting what they see to be thus approved, and rejecting all else. It is to this end, to enable the student to trace the subject in the divinely inspired Record, that we so freely intersperse both quotations and citations of the Scriptures upon which to build.[6]1900s: It is not our intention to enter upon the role of prophet to any degree, but merely to give below what seems to us rather likely to be the trend of events—giving also the reasons for our expectations.[7]
Someone may ask, Do you, then, claim infallibility and that every sentence appearing in "The Watch Tower" publications is stated with absolute correctness? Assuredly we make no such claim and have never made such a claim. What motive can our opponents have in so charging against us? Are they not seeking to set up a falsehood to give themselves excuse for making attacks and to endeavor to pervert the judgments of others?[8]
1910s: However, we should not denounce those who in a proper spirit express their dissent in respect to the date mentioned [1914] and what may there be expected . . . We must admit that there are possibilities of our having made a mistake in respect to the chronology, even though we do not see where any mistake has been made in calculating the seven times of the Gentiles as expiring about October 1, 1914.[9]
1920s: Many students have made the grievous mistake of thinking that God has inspired men to interpret prophecy. The holy prophets of the Old Testament were inspired by Jehovah to write as his power moved upon them. The writers of the New Testament were clothed with certain power and authority to write as the Lord directed them. However, since the days of the apostles no man on earth has been inspired to write prophecy, nor has any man been inspired to interpret prophecy.[10]
1930s: We are not a prophet; we merely believe that we have come to the place where the Gentile times have ended[11]
1940s: This pouring out of God's spirit upon the flesh of all his faithful anointed witnesses does not mean those now serving as Jehovah's Witnesses are inspired. It does not mean that the writings in this magazine The Watchtower are inspired and infallible and without mistakes. It does not mean that the president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society is inspired and infallible, although enemies falsely charge us with believing so.... But we confess with the Scriptures that the day of such inspiration passed long before 1870, as the apostle Paul showed it would. . . . Inspired speaking and writing passed away with the last of the twelve apostles, by whom the gifts of the spirit were imparted to others. Yet God is still able to teach and lead us. While confessing no inspiration for today for anyone on earth, we do have the privilege of praying God for more of his holy spirit and for his guidance of us by the bestowal of his spirit through Jesus Christ.[12]
1950s: The Watchtower does not claim to be inspired in its utterances,nor is it dogmatic. It invites careful and critical examination of its contents in the light of the Scriptures.[13]
1960s: The book [Life Everlasting in Freedom of Sons of God] merely presents the chronology. You can accept it or reject it[14]
Our chronology, however, ... is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible)[15]
Don't any of you be specific in saying anything that is going to happen between now and 1975
F. W. Franz, quoted in The Watchtower, 15 October 1966, page 231.
1970s: In this regard, however, it must be observed that this “faithful and discreet slave” was never inspired, never perfect. Those writings by certain members of the “slave” class that came to form the Christian part of God’s Word were inspired and infallible, but that is not true of other writings since. Things published were not perfect in the days of Charles Taze Russell, first president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society; nor were they perfect in the days of J. F. Rutherford, the succeeding president. The increasing light on God’s Word as well as the facts of history have repeatedly required that adjustments of one kind or another be made down to the very present time.[16]
1980s: It is not claimed that the explanations in this publication are infallible. Like Joseph of old, we say: “Do not interpretations belong to God?” (Genesis 40:8) At the same time, however, we firmly believe that the explanations set forth herein harmonize with the Bible in its entirety, showing how remarkably divine prophecy has been fulfilled in the world events of our catastrophic times.[17]
1990s: Those who make up the one true Christian organization today do not have angelic revelations or divine inspiration. But they do have the inspired Holy Scriptures, which contain revelations of God’s thinking and will. As an organization and individually, they must accept the Bible as divine truth, study it carefully, and let it work in them.[18]
2000s: Although the slave class is defined as “faithful and discreet,” Jesus did not say that it would be infallible. This group of faithful anointed brothers still consists of imperfect Christians. Even with the best of intentions, they can be mistaken, as such men sometimes were in the first century.[19]
It’s therefore quite clear that Jehovah’s Witnesses make no claim to divine inspiration for their publications. Thus, the critics' assertion that “the Watch Tower claims to be an inspired prophet” is manifestly false.
Did Haydon Covington concede that the Watch Tower is a False Prophet?
Did Haydon Covington concede in the Walsh trial that the Watch Tower Society has promulgated false prophecy, as is stated by critics? Even if he had done so, what would that have proved? If Covington had said that the thought the Society was a false prophet, then he would have been mistaken, that is all. However, a look at the court record (even as it is quoted on anti-Witness web pages) shows that Covington did nothing of the sort.
Critics' allegations that 'The Watchtower claims to be an inspired prophet' are manifestly false
The court records show that Covington said: “I do not think we have promulgated false prophecy ... there have been statements that were erroneous, that is the way I put it, and mistaken.” When asked hypothetically if it would have been a false prophecy if the Society had authoritatively promulgated 1874 as the date for the return of Christ’s coming, Covington himself pointed out that this was only an assumption, and is then is recorded as having said the words “I agree that”. This is an incomplete sentence in English. Now it could very well be that he was interrupted and was not intending to agree that a false prophecy had been made. If we take the court to read “I agree to that”, he was simply agreeing hypothetically that the Society would have been guilty of false prophecy under a certain set of circumstances, namely if it had promulgated as authoritative that Christ returned in 1874. Now the records show that Covington had not studied the Society’s literature relating to 1874, saying “you are speaking of a matter that I know nothing of.” So, Covington’s comments, viewed in their proper context do not prove the point Witness critics are trying to make. Covington certainly did not mean that the Society was responsible for a false prophecy, as he had just a few moments earlier stated the very opposite. And as we have seen, the Society did not ‘authoritatively promulgate’ 1874 as the date, it merely presented it to its readers to decide for themselves.
Of course, Witnesses do believe that God is using them - and their publications - to accomplish his work. But that is not the same as believing that God personally directs the writing of Watchtower Publications in the way that he inspired the Bible. The above quotations - and many others - show that at no time in the history of the organization has it claimed to be God’s prophet, inspired or infallible.[20]
It is evident here that critics are setting up a straw man argument. In other words, they are imputing to Watch Tower a position that it does not claim for itself and then refuting that position, instead of the Society’s actual position. This is really nothing but a dishonest debating trick.
Thus, the Watch Tower quotations, taken in context and stripped of all hyperbole and rhetoric, establish basically one thing only: that Watch Tower publications have on a number of occasions presented interpretations of Bible prophecies which later turned out to be incorrect. It is not possible to argue on the basis of the Watchtower literature that (1) the Society claims that its literature is inspired of God or infallible, (2) that it claimed to speak in the name of God as a prophet.
Admittedly, it would certainly have been better for all concerned had the publications refrained from publishing such speculative interpretations, which doubtless led to disappointment for many. ‘The Watchtower’, far from covering over these facts, has admitted openly that this is the case, as is seen from the following extract from The Watchtower.
In its issue of July 15, 1976, The Watchtower, commenting on the inadvisability of setting our sights on a certain date, stated: “If anyone has been disappointed through not following this line of thought, he should now concentrate on adjusting his viewpoint, seeing that it was not the word of God that failed or deceived him and brought disappointment, but that his own understanding was based on wrong premises.” In saying “anyone,” The Watchtower included all disappointed ones of Jehovah’s Witnesses, hence including persons having to do with the publication of the information that contributed to the buildup of hopes centered on that date.[21]
Thus the Watch Tower Society has recognised that it was a mistake to speculate. But was it the only ever religious organization to make such a mistake?
Double Standards and Bigotry
If Jehovah’s Witnesses have had mistaken expectations about the fulfillment of Bible prophecies, they are far from alone. Many other students of the Bible - including some highly respected Catholic and Protestant writers - have made similar mistakes to Jehovah’s Witnesses. Whole books have been written on the subject of predictions that failed to come true, but let’s look at just three examples from the world of Protestantism: Martin Luther, John Wesley and Billy Graham.
Protestant leader Martin Luther, believed that the end would come in his day. He believed theMartin Luther Turkish war would be "the final wrath of God, in which the world will come to an end and Christ will come to destroy Gog and Magog and set free His own"?[22] and that "Christ has given a sign by which one can know when the Judgment Day is near. When the Turk will have an end, we can certainly predict that the Judgment must be at the door"[23]
John WesleyMethodist founder John Wesley wrote: "1836 The end of the non-chronos, and of the many kings; the fulfilling of the word, and of the mystery of God; the repentance of the survivors in the great city; the end of the 'little time,' and of the three times and a half; the destruction of the east; the imprisonment of Satan."[24]
In 1950, Billy Graham, the well-known US evangelist, told a rally in LosBilly GrahamAngeles: “I sincerely believe that the Lord draweth nigh. We may have another year, maybe two years, to work for Jesus Christ, and, Ladies and Gentlemen, I believe it is all going to be over ... two years and it’s all going to be over.”[25]
If it had been Jehovah’s Witnesses who had said the things that Luther, Wesley and Graham proclaimed, these proclamations would have been added to the list of quotations supposedly proving McLoughlin, William G., 1978 Revivals, Awakenings and Reform. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. pp.185.that the Witnesses are false prophets. Unsurprisingly, however, the sources that attack the Witnesses for false prophecy do not generally take the same position when it comes to Protestant figures who have made very similar errors.
This should give all of us food for thought. If a newspaper editor were to publish in his paper all the crimes committed by members of just one ethnic group or race, dwelling on them in great detail, even repeatedly bringing up very old offences, but at the same time, ignoring all the crimes committed by members of another group (perhaps his own), then thinking people who looked at the facts would conclude that he was nothing but a bigot. What are we to think, then, when certain ones opposed to Jehovah’s Witnesses constantly harp on what they incorrectly and maliciously term “false prophecies” of the organization, reproducing ad nauseam the same quotations from Watch Tower literature, the majority of which were published almost 100 years ago, while remaining deadly silent about all similar errors by those who share their theological convictions? Is the word ‘bigoted’ any less appropriate? At any rate, their agenda is obvious and respect for the truth is not high on their list of priorities.
Were Martin Luther, John Wesley and Billy Graham false prophets?
I do not think that the comments of Luther, Wesley or Graham make them false prophets, for the same reason that I don’t accept that the Watch Tower is a false prophet, namely, that interpreting Bible prophecy is not the same as prophesying.
Prophecy and Interpretation
It is true that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe they are being guided by God. But, ‘guidance’ is a much broader concept than ‘inspiration’. True, inspiration is a form of guidance, but it is only one form. In this regard, Stafford makes a very telling point:
It cannot truthfully be said that to be inspired by God to produce flawless information is the same as being guided or lead by a flawless source, whether that source be the Scriptures or an angel sent by God. Why? Because in the former case the person is taken over by God, given a vision, revelation (sometimes in a dream), or put into a trance. The person then receives God's thoughts and will which are then channelled through the individual, providing information he or she would otherwise not have known. However, in the latter case one could simply misunderstand or ignore the directions given, which would make the accuracy of what they do or say dependent upon whether or not they correctly understood the inspired source.[26]
“Prophecy” involves much more than simply predicting the future. It involves claiming to have a message directly from God. It is not the same as interpreting events or even interpreting the prophetic parts of the Bible. Russell understood this and that is why he said: “The most we claim or have ever claimed for our teachings is that they are what we believe to be harmonious interpretations of the divine Word, in harmony with the spirit of the truth”, adding “we are far from claiming any direct plenary inspiration”[27]
The Watch Tower Society is not a false prophet, for the simple reason that it is not a prophet.
Similarly, when Wesley drew the conclusion that the end would come in 1836, he did so on the basis of his understanding of the Bible. Of course, this understanding turned out to be completely and utterly wrong, but that does not make him a false prophet. When Billy Graham stated in 1950 that the end would come within two years, he was not claiming that God had personally spoken to him through a dream or a vision. He was just stating what he believed after comparing world events with what he knew from the Bible. No charitable person would accuse Graham of being a false prophet because of that (although it is obvious that he did make an error of judgment). Likewise, when Luther stated that the Turkish war would lead to the end of the world, he was woefully mistaken, but that certainly does not make him a false prophet. Incidentally, Luther, on the basis of his understanding of the Bible, also contradicted Copernicus and insisted that the earth was the centre of the universe! [28]
Thus, the Watch Tower Society is not a false prophet, for the simple reason that it is not a prophet. It makes no claim that any of its members have heard voices from God, seen visions or in any other way been directly influenced to make a certain proclamation beyond what is in the Bible. It has made mistakes in explaining or interpreting parts of the Bible, but as we have seen, so have other religious organizations.
Conclusion
On the basis of the above, critics of Jehovah's Witnesses have some questions to answer:
(1) Do they think it is truthful and fair to focus on a minute selection of the Watch Tower’s published material - the most negative part - and ignore everything else?
(2) Can they cite the Watch Tower publication where the Society claims to be an “inspired prophet” (their expression, not ours). On what do they base that conclusion, and how do they explain the dozens of quotations I have presented from the Society’s literature - from all periods of its history - where the Society denies that?[29]
(3) Why do they present the Watchtower’s statements about future events as prophetic statements, rather than what they really were - interpretations?
(4) Do they believe that others who have had mistaken expectations, including Martin Luther, John Wesley and Billy Graham, are false prophets, and if not, why not?
Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that they should be above honest criticism and have not hidden the fact that they have made errors in their interpretations. But honest criticism implies respect for truth - the whole truth, not just extracts taken out of context and twisted to give an impression that they were never intended to give.
Beware of half truths. You might end up believing the wrong half!
Footnotes and References
[1] I am grateful to other Witness writers for bringing many of these citations to my attention. Additionally, the book Jehovah’s Witnesses Defended, Second Edition [JWD2] by Greg Stafford contains extensive research on this matter. Quotations from publications after 1950 are generally taken from the Watchtower Library 2003 CD-ROM. Almost all Russell’s writings are freely available on the Internet.
[2] Zion's Watch Tower, January 1, 1908 (reprint) page 4110
[3] The Watch Tower, January 1, 1925, page 3.
[4] The Watchtower, 15 October 1966, page 631.
[5] Zion’s Watch Tower, January 1883, page 425.
[6] Zion 's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 December 1896, reprint, 2080 (emphasis added).
[7] "Views From the Watch Tower," Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 1 March 1904, reprint, 3327 (emphasis added).
[8] Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 September 1909, reprint, 4473.
[9] The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 November 1913, repr. 5348 (emphasis added).
[10] Prophecy (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1929), 61-62 (emphasis added).
[11] Light, vol. 1 (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1930), 194 (emphasis added).
[12] The Watchtower, 15 May 1947, pp. 157-8.
[13] "Name and Purpose of the Watchtower," The Watchtower, 15 August 1950, 262-263 (emphasis added)
[14] The Watchtower, 15 October 1966, page 631.
[15] The Watchtower, 15 August 1968, page 499.
[16] The Watchtower, 1 March 1979, page 23-24.
[17] Revelation - Its Grand Climax at Hand, page 9. (Published 1988)
[18] Jehovah’s Witnesses - Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom, page 708 (Published 1993)
[19] The Watchtower, 1 December 2002, page 17.
[20] Occasionally, The Watchtower (for example 1 April 1972) has referred to true Christians (not specifically to the writers of Watch Tower publications) as “prophets”. However, the word is placed in inverted commas, which shows that it is not meant literally. The 1972 article is simply drawing parallels between experiences in the life of the prophet Ezekiel and those of Christians today as they fulfil Christ’s commission to preach to all the nations. This sense of the word ‘prophecy’ is recognised by many ‘mainstream’ Christians., Billy Graham’s biography is called “A prophet with Honor” . Pope John Paul II spoke of ‘the ‘prophetic office’ of the People of God - meaning their responsibility to give a Christian witness. (http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0264of.htm) In view of other comments (cited in the main article) in which the Society specifically repudiates prophet status, both before and after this article was published, attempts to use this article to demonstrate that the Watch Tower Society claims to be an inspired prophet are obviously misrepresenting the sense of the article.
[21] The Watchtower, 15 March 1980, page 17-18.
[22] John T. Baldwin, "Luther's Eschatological Appraisal of the Turkish Threat in Eine Heerpredigt -wider den Tuerken [Army Sermon Against the Turks],"Andrews University Seminary Studies 33.2 (Autumn 1995), 196.
[23] Ibid, p. 201.
[24]http://www.ccel.org/ccel/wesley/notes.i.xxviii.xxiii.html
[25] McLoughlin, William G., 1978 Revivals, Awakenings and Reform. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. pp.185. See also “US News and World Report” (December 19, 1994)
[26] Jehovah’s Witnesses Defended, Second Edition, pp. 462-3.
[27] Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 July 1899, reprint, 2506
[28] Luther is also quoted on certain websites as having said that Jesus would return 300 years from his time. (The Familiar Discourses of Dr. Martin Luther, trans. by Henry Bell and revised by Joseph Kerby [London: Baldwin, Craddock and Joy, 1818], pp. 7,8.) I have not been able to verify this source, although I have no reason to doubt it.
[29] A computer search for the expression “inspired prophet” on the Watchtower 2003 CD-ROM (containing The Watchtower) since 1950 plus most other publications, revealed that the expression came up 44 times. Every single occurrence was referring to a Bible writer.
Notice the quotation marks around the word prophet in many of those quotes, I would also like to point out that those statements disclaiming the inspired nature of their expectations were made BEFORE the disappointments not after, as they were made beforehand you have no case,if they were made afterward you could argue that this is some kind of post hoc rationalization but not when they were made beforehand. Do you consider Martin Luther and John Wesley to be false prophets? Good catholic that you are you may consider a pair of the reformation's leading lights to be false prophets what about church father tertillian?
ReplyDeleteAnother consideration is that we are cessationists there is no charismatic movement among us so doctrinal orthodoxy preclude the acknowledgement of any modern prophet.
From the aid to Bible understanding article "gifts from God"
Subheading:gifts of the spirit:In the first century C.E. miraculous gifts attended the baptism with holy spirit. These served as signs and portents that God was no longer using the Jewish congregation in his service but that his approval rested on the Christian congregation established by his Son. (Heb. 2:2-4) On the day of Pentecost, miraculous gifts accompanied the outpouring of the holy spirit and in each case mentioned thereafter in the Scriptures where the miraculous gifts of the spirit were transmitted, one or more of the apostles directly chosen by Jesus were present. (Acts 2:1, 4, 14; 8:9-20; 10:44-46; 19:6) Evidently, with the death of the apostles, the transmittal of the gifts of the spirit ended, and the miraculous gifts of the spirit ceased altogether as those having received these gifts passed off the earthly In the first century C.E. miraculous gifts attended the baptism with holy spirit. These served as signs and portents that God was no longer using the Jewish congregation in his service but that his approval rested on the Christian congregation established by his Son. (Heb. 2:2-4) On the day of Pentecost, miraculous gifts accompanied the outpouring of the holy spirit and in each case mentioned thereafter in the Scriptures where the miraculous gifts of the spirit were transmitted, one or more of the apostles directly chosen by Jesus were present. (Acts 2:1, 4, 14; 8:9-20; 10:44-46; 19:6) Evidently, with the death of the apostles, the transmittal of the gifts of the spirit ended, and the miraculous gifts of the spirit ceased altogether as those having received these gifts passed off the earthly scene.
Your argument primarily attempts to deflect criticism of Jehovah’s Witnesses by invoking cessationism, accusing critics of bigotry, and pointing to perceived flaws in “Christendom,” but these deflections do not address the central issue of false predictions made by the Watchtower Society. You also presented several flawed arguments that fail to adequately address the core issue: the Watchtower Society’s repeated self-identification as a “prophet,” its authoritative proclamations about future events, and the subsequent failed predictions.
ReplyDeleteFirst, the claim that their "uninspired nature" excuses incorrect predictions overlooks a fundamental problem: the Watchtower’s repeated proclamations of future events under the guise of biblical interpretation. These were not presented as speculative theological musings but were taught authoritatively as truths. For example, dates like 1914, 1925, and 1975 were presented with such confidence that members were led to adjust their lives and expectations accordingly. While the Society may claim that such pronouncements were not prophecies in the strict sense, the practical impact on adherents’ lives was indistinguishable from what would occur if they were believed to be divine revelations. Calling these merely “misunderstandings” or “expectations” does not absolve the organization of its responsibility for the disappointment and spiritual harm caused by these erroneous teachings.
The reference to Daniel 12:8-9 and Revelation 5:1-5 as evidence of "gradual unsealing of prophecy" is a misapplication of the text. These passages do not support a model of ever-changing interpretations of Scripture. Instead, they describe specific eschatological events under God’s sovereign control. The gradual unveiling of prophecy in the Bible pertains to God’s plan for salvation history as revealed through Jesus Christ and the apostles—not to organizations repeatedly revising their teachings over time. The Watchtower’s appeal to these passages as justification for doctrinal changes undermines the biblical concept of God's immutable truth. It also contradicts Hebrews 13:8, which affirms that Jesus Christ is the same "yesterday and today and forever."
The accusation of bigotry against critics further fails to engage with the substance of the criticisms. Suggesting that critics are biased for pointing out the Watchtower’s errors is an ad hominem fallacy, designed to discredit the person making the argument rather than addressing the argument itself. Whether or not critics have biases does not negate the factual reality of the Watchtower’s failed predictions and doctrinal inconsistencies. Moreover, the suggestion that critics "hide" the Society’s disclaimers of inspiration is unfounded. These disclaimers, while occasionally stated, are irrelevant to the issue: it is not whether the Watchtower explicitly claimed inspiration, but whether its authoritative teaching led followers to believe and act as though the organization had divine backing.
The attempt to paint “Christendom” as more guilty of false prophecy, through references to visions, miraculous claims, or the Opium War, is a classic red herring and „te quoque” defense. Even if some within Catholic or Protestant traditions have made errors or questionable moral decisions, these do not excuse or diminish the errors of the Watchtower Society. The Bible holds every teacher and organization accountable for their own actions (James 3:1), and the sins of others do not absolve Jehovah’s Witnesses of theirs. Furthermore, the historical events cited, such as missionary involvement in the Opium War, are irrelevant to the specific theological issue of false prophecy. These events, though condemnable, are not analogous to the repeated doctrinal shifts and failed eschatological claims of the Watchtower Society.
I said that it is your church that is acting on the continuationist paradigm therefore it is your church that us open to the false prophet claim not us ,we did not claim to utter a prophesy there fore we are.not liable to any claim of false prophesy ,you seize on this to divert from the Far more serious crime of the oceans of innocent blood your church has spilt and continues to spill and the fact that visions that you claim you receive from Mary and the saints have proved to be false.
DeleteAs your understanding of an idea becomes more complete whatever extrapolations you made are bound to be adjusted,and that is the issue the understanding of prophecy and extrapolations based on those understanding, of course our enemies are desperate to halt our advance they have shown a willingness to even stoop to violence in their attempts at destroying us so dishonest argumentation is certainly not a bridge too far,
DeleteThis argument from the Watchtower adherent conflates various issues in an attempt to deflect from core concerns about their organization’s credibility. Below is a detailed refutation of the key claims made in the text, showing its flaws, inconsistencies, and logical fallacies.
ReplyDeleteJWs have repeatedly claimed that their organization acts as God’s "prophet" (e.g., The Watchtower, January 15, 1959, p. 40-41; April 1, 1972, p. 197), while also denying infallibility or being inspired. However, Deuteronomy 18:20-22 defines a false prophet as anyone who speaks in God’s name and whose predictions fail—whether they claim inspiration or not. Thus, by claiming to represent Jehovah yet making incorrect predictions (e.g., 1914, 1925, 1975), the organization meets the biblical definition of a false prophet. While Jehovah’s Witnesses deny being continuationists, they claim to receive "progressive revelations" and act as God's exclusive channel. This is functionally equivalent to continuationist claims, as it implies ongoing divine guidance.
Numerous publications by the Watchtower Society (e.g., Millions Now Living Will Never Die, 1920, p. 89-90) predicted specific events (e.g., Armageddon, the resurrection of patriarchs) that failed to materialize. Denying these as prophecies is disingenuous when they were presented as definitive statements of God's will. The Bible does not distinguish between "inspired" and "uninspired" prophecy. False prophecy is determined by whether a statement in God’s name comes true (Deut. 18:22). The Watchtower's failed predictions qualify regardless of their disclaimers. Deceptively framing failed predictions as mere "expectations" evades accountability. If they truly represent Jehovah, their statements should reflect His infallibility. By shifting blame to their followers for misunderstanding, the organization demonstrates a lack of transparency and integrity.
Pointing to historical sins of individuals within the Catholic Church (e.g., during the Crusades or Inquisitions) is not a substantive counterargument, but a red herring and te quoque defense, and whataboutism. These actions are not representative of the Church’s core teachings. The Church has consistently taught the sanctity of life and repentance for sin. Jehovah's Witnesses, on the other hand, have their own issues with harmful policies, such as the blood transfusion ban, which has led to countless preventable deaths; and disfellowshipping and shunning practices that harm families and individuals emotionally and psychologically. The Catholic Church’s history spans over 2,000 years and encompasses diverse political, cultural, and social contexts. It is unfair to compare its historical missteps with the short, centralized history of Jehovah’s Witnesses while ignoring the latter's harmful practices.
The Catholic Church does not endorse every reported vision. Apparitions like those at Lourdes and Fatima undergo rigorous investigation before being declared credible. False claims or misunderstandings do not discredit the Church as a whole. The Bible records visions and dreams as legitimate means of divine communication (e.g., Acts 10:9-16, Matthew 17:1-9). Rejecting all visions contradicts Scripture, especially when the Jehovah's Witness organization claims to receive divine "guidance." By the way, as a Catholic, it is not mandatory to believe in private revelations at all; for example, if I do not believe in a single Marian apparition, I can still be a Catholic in good standing.
Deuteronomy 18 is about identifying a prophet like moses it is you people who are claiming to have supernatural prophetic abilities like moses not us this is just projection,the Bible says that Christians will be identified by the peace among them not by a plenary understanding of bible prophesy,christemdom manifest does not enjoy that peace see Isaiah ch.2:2-5 christendom has been doing the opposite of what Isaiah prophesied.
DeleteThe bible is clear that the mass murdering thuggery for which christendom is well known, is a definte disqualifier from sacred service as representative of JEHOVAH and his Son.
Delete1John ch.3:10NIV"This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister."
Deuteronomy 18:20-22 explicitly outlines how to identify false prophets:
ReplyDelete• "But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death." (Deuteronomy 18:20, NIV)
• "You may say to yourselves, 'How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?' If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken." (Deuteronomy 18:21-22, NIV)
This passage applies broadly to ANYONE who claims to speak in God’s name but delivers false predictions, not just to someone claiming to be “a prophet like Moses.” While Deuteronomy 18 does contain a prophecy about the coming of Christ as the ultimate Prophet (verse 15), verses 20-22 address the more general issue of how to identify false prophets. Deuteronomy 18:20-22 applies to anyone claiming to speak for God while making false predictions. It is not limited to identifying “a prophet like Moses.” If an organization claims to speak in God’s name but delivers failed predictions, it falls under the condemnation of this passage.
The Jehovah's Witnesses have repeatedly claimed to be God’s “prophet-like” channel of communication, even describing themselves as a modern “Ezekiel class” or a collective prophet. However, they have made numerous failed predictions about key eschatological events, like the end of the world in 1914, 1925, and 1975, or the the generation of 1914 would not pass away before Armageddon. These predictions were made with the claim of divine backing, but they did not come true. According to Deuteronomy 18:22, this demonstrates that these were not messages from God. If Jehovah’s Witnesses claim to speak in God’s name (which they have done) and their predictions fail, Deuteronomy 18:20-22 applies directly to them. Their argument that Deuteronomy 18 is only about a prophet like Moses is an attempt to evade accountability.
The claim that others (e.g., “Christendom”) are projecting their own errors onto Jehovah’s Witnesses is unfounded. The argument ignores the documented evidence of the Watchtower's own failed predictions. Furthermore mainstream Christian denominations do not claim to have the kind of exclusive, prophetic authority that Jehovah’s Witnesses do. The New Testament teaches that no one knows the exact timing of the end (Matthew 24:36), which directly contradicts the Watchtower’s repeated date-setting. Christians who adhere to the Bible do not claim to possess prophetic abilities like Moses. It is the Watchtower Society that has claimed prophetic authority while delivering failed predictions.
The Watchtower’s argument regarding Isaiah 2:2-5 misapplies this prophecy. The text speaks of a future time when nations will seek God’s ways, resulting in peace. However, this prophecy does not describe the criteria for identifying God’s people prior to its fulfillment. Isaiah 2:2-5 refers to a future eschatological period of peace under God’s direct rule, not a present human effort, to a vision of God’s kingdom being universally recognized. While peace among Christians is a mark of their faith (John 13:34-35), this is not the same as claiming that any organization perfectly fulfills Isaiah 2:2-5 today. Additionally, the argument against “Christendom” ignores the historical context of Isaiah’s prophecy. It applies to the messianic kingdom and not to the organizational disputes among modern religious groups. So Isaiah 2:2-5 speaks about a future messianic age of universal peace, not the present status of any religious organization. Claiming to fulfill this prophecy today is unwarranted.
You really want to compare mass murder and tolerance of gross sin not just in the pews which would be bad enough ,but from the pulpit ,we have been consistent on what matters to JEHOVAH definitely not murdering fellow human would be near the top of the list,not tolerating immorality, identifying the only God worthy of our latreo, the only priest from whom this God will receive intercession,the condition of the dead the mechanism of the ransom ,the millennium, the purpose of the millennium true separation from the present civilization that we may qualify as founders of a new civilization of JEHOVAH'S Making,we have been consistent on the big stuff,chtistendom has been inconsistent or a no show on the big stuff while sweating the small stuff. The Jews would have made the same argument against the hated sect of messianists that had recently come along in the first century outrageously claiming to be JEHOVAH'S True church,they too would have been able to point to unfulfilled expectations these neophytes once broadcasted. Would you have identified the the true Messiah and his true church if you were back there with this mindset that prefers form to substance
ReplyDeleteThere is no peace in christendom period within churches not among churches definitely, what harmful policy the mass murder of religious minorities and and Co religionists over political differences there no harmful policies among JEHOVAH'S People there are only liars like yourself trying to divert attention from the obviously murderous nature your church,everybody who takes the vow knows that if he later turns his back on his vow the Bible's sanction awaits it is no secret,the sanction is there to prevent frivolous taking of the vow of dedication,how anyone can compare the voluntary taking of an oath with a known sanction expulsion from the community with the oceans of innocent blood spilt by Christendom and her tolerating of gross sin even among her teachers is beyond me and christendom's wicked three headed demon God is not content to have his thugs harass us in this life he threatens eternal torture in the next life.
ReplyDeleteA lot of cognitive dissonance is at work to see in the peace JEHOVAH Has given his loyal servants the work of Satan and in the bloodstained oppression of christendom the work the prince of peace and his God of peace. Let me make it clear though that I am not singling out the catholic church the protestants and orthodox churches have been at least as oppressive.
What matters is the way we interpret the words of our teachers not those meanings imposed on them by unprincipled enemies who have repeatedly shown a willingness to stoop to even murder in their desperation to be rid of us such cannot seriously be counted as good faith critics ,the apostles had wrong expectations. We know John the Baptist had wrong expectations this was unavoidable due to an incomplete understanding of the relevant policies nobody calls them false prophets the fruit of peace among them established the presence of JEHOVAH'S spirit among them,in fulfillment if Isaiah's prophecy at Isaiah 2:2-4 the notion that the blood stained anarchy and oppression of christendom is the product of Christ and the global peace we enjoy is the product of Satan is utterly irrational
ReplyDeleteWhat matters is the way we interpret the words of our teachers not those meanings imposed on them by unprincipled enemies who have repeatedly shown a willingness to stoop to even murder in their desperation to be rid of us such cannot seriously be counted as good faith critics ,the apostles had wrong expectations. We know John the Baptist had wrong expectations this was unavoidable due to an incomplete understanding of the relevant policies nobody calls them false prophets the fruit of peace among them established the presence of JEHOVAH'S spirit among them,in fulfillment if Isaiah's prophecy at Isaiah 2:2-4 the notion that the blood stained anarchy and oppression of christendom is the product of Christ and the global peace we enjoy is the product of Satan is utterly irrational
ReplyDeleteYour assertions prove nothing the timing given for the prophecy is the end times,the period between the appearance of the Messiah and the destruction of the temple is an end time period the first century church was noted for its unity and it's refusal to take up arms even against its enemies,JEHOVAH'S Modern day servants resemble that peace far more than christendom ever has what I said was that the brothers have never claimed supernatural inspiration where as charismatic of christendom have so a charge of false prophet could more properly be brought against those claiming actual prophecy than against those who repeatedly disclaimed actual prophecy, the churches of christendom have always taken sides with their respective nations, they are definitely not beating swords into plowshares. History and the present is the basis for the observation that christendom is not a force for peace. And that only JEHOVAH can be the source of the unique peace hus people enjoy.
ReplyDeleteOur understanding of being the channel of JEHOVAH has nothing to do with uttering original prophecy so no there IS no contradiction only your desperate attempt to excuse the unchristian mass murder of the churches of christendom, JWs never picked up the sword against their enemies including those leaving our ranks to make common cause with christendom against us so again you totally miss the point, the bloodstained history of christendom disqualified her as representative of the true God JEHOVAH and his Messiah, her depiction of God as an utterly incomprehensible mystery is definitely not the depiction we find in scripture,
ReplyDeleteThe JWs have no splits because we heed the bible's counsel to expel self appointed apostles, see Revelation ch.2:2 but we have never used state power against those opposing us even those making common cause with christendom against us,so this can in no way be compared with christendom's bloody oppression if religious minorities and her slaughtering of coreligionists over political differences,it is measure of the braineating nature of your doctrine that you think that stumbling in exegesis can in any way be compared to mass murder, apart from defying logic and scripture your three headed God is a failure,he has failed to stop his people from killing each other ,which us a disqualified failure.
DeleteThe failed predictions are not false prophecies though, and of course we accept responsibility for clumsy exegesis but any attempt to accuse us of claiming inspiration or infalliblity like catholicism's popes have is a flat out lie. one must claim to be a prophet like christendom's pope has by claiming infallibility to be a false prophet in the deuteronomy ch.18 sense they also claim to be receiving dreams and visions from dead saints which is necromancy a form of sorcery this along with their murdering of religious minorities clearly exposes them as part of babylon the great. Revelation ch.18:23NLT "The light of a lamp will never shine in you again. The happy voices of brides and grooms will never be heard in you again. For your merchants were the greatest in the world, and you deceived the nations with your SORCERIES."
ReplyDeleteThis combined with their mass murder see Revelation ch.18:24 clearly exposes them as the demonised fraud that they are And now you are indulging in projection,to excuse the oceans of innocent blood that your church has spilt no amount of lies will ever sweep away Your bloodguilt it will cling to christendom just as the blood of abel clinged to cain. The Bible makes in plain that the spilling of innocent blood is of Satan and his false church babylon the great which includes but is not limited to the churches of christendom they dominate it and are the most reprehensible members of it because they lyingly pretend to be acting in behalf of Christ, the most important truths from JEHOVAH'S standpoint is the clear identification of JEHOVAH as the only God to whom we owe latreo and the one priest from whom he will receive intercession,and moral and religious standards will give us religious and moral purity in their eyes. the innocent blood spilt by christendom cries out for justice especially the blood of JEHOVAH'S Loyal servants which you have never repented of the fact that we have harbored wrong expectations like JEHOVAH'S Servants in times past does not begin to compare with christendom's mass murder and tolerating of gross sin not merely in the pews but from the pulpit, you are indulging in nothing but projection and deflection ,I will never forget the blood of my fallen brothers with which you have stained your hands and for which you obviously feel no remorse and JEHOVAH Remembers too be sure of that.
That is what the Bible commands us to do if you don't agree with our doctrine keep out there is nothing misleading about what I said only those who are baptized are liable to the BIBLE'S Sanction at 1CORINTHIANS CH.5:11-13 and there is no infant baptism in our theology , There is zero evidence that those who opt for bloodless medicine are more likely to die than those who do not the fact of the matter is that transfusions kill people,the British government recently had to pay out tens of millions in compensation for people killed by by blood transfusions. So check your facts and stop mindlessly copying and pasting propaganda,
ReplyDeletehttps://aservantofjehovah.blogspot.com/2024/12/groks-take-on-bloodless-medicine.html
In the 1970s and 1980s in the United Kingdom 4670 patients with haemophilia were exposed to hepatitis C through contaminated NHS blood and blood products, and of this group 1243 were also exposed to HIV. So far 1757 of these patients have died, and many more are now terminally ill.
Deletehttps://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1857798/#:~:text=In%20the%201970s%20and%201980s%20in%20the%20United%20Kingdom%204670,more%20are%20now%20terminally%20ill.
This argument regarding blood transfusions is flawed and oversimplified for several reasons. While the tragic example of contaminated blood products in the UK in the 1970s and 1980s illustrates the need for safety in medical practices, it does not justify a blanket ban on blood transfusions for the following reasons. The example of contaminated blood transfusions during the 1970s and 1980s in the UK is being used selectively. This tragedy occurred due to failures in medical screening and oversight, not because blood transfusions themselves are inherently dangerous. Today, blood safety standards have drastically improved, and such incidents are exceedingly rare. Modern blood testing has made transfusions a safe and life-saving medical practice. Since the 1980s, significant advances in blood screening for diseases like HIV and hepatitis C have made transfusions far safer. Using a historical tragedy from decades ago to argue against current medical practices ignores these improvements.
DeleteThe statement implies that Jehovah’s Witnesses’ survival is proof of the correctness of their doctrine. This is a logical fallacy. Just because Jehovah’s Witnesses may not have been exposed to contaminated blood products does not mean their stance against blood transfusions is correct or justified. Avoiding one specific risk does not validate a broader prohibition, especially when it places individuals at risk in other life-threatening situations. Highlighting instances where refusal of blood transfusions has seemingly prevented harm ignores the many cases where such refusal has led to unnecessary deaths or suffering.
The Jehovah’s Witness prohibition on blood transfusions is based on misinterpretation of scriptural passages such as Acts 15:28-29 and Leviticus 17:10-14. These passages prohibit the consumption of blood as food, not its medical use. The context of these commands was dietary and symbolic, reflecting God’s covenant with Israel. Blood transfusions, which serve a life-saving purpose and do not involve eating, fall outside the scope of these biblical injunctions. Jesus emphasized mercy and saving lives, teaching that life and well-being take precedence over strict ritual adherence (Matthew 12:7, Mark 2:27). Refusing a life-saving treatment like a blood transfusion runs contrary to the overarching biblical principle of valuing human life.
Jehovah’s Witnesses’ refusal of blood transfusions has led to preventable deaths. Numerous documented cases show that refusal of blood transfusions has resulted in deaths that could have been prevented with this life-saving treatment. Examples include postpartum hemorrhage, surgical complications, and traumatic blood loss. While transfusions are banned, Jehovah’s Witnesses permit the use of blood fractions and derivatives, such as clotting factors and albumin. This inconsistency undermines their interpretation of biblical texts, as these fractions are also derived from blood.
While it is important to explore alternatives to transfusions (e.g., bloodless surgery), this should not justify a blanket ban. Modern medicine increasingly seeks alternatives to blood transfusions for medical and ethical reasons, but this does not render transfusions unnecessary or morally wrong. Individual medical needs vary. For some patients, transfusions remain the only viable option to save lives. A rigid ban disregards individual circumstances and medical ethics.
Christianity does not endorse rejecting medical treatment, including blood transfusions. Scripture affirms the use of medicine and healing as blessings from God. For example, Paul advises Timothy to use wine for his stomach ailments (1 Timothy 5:23), showing that medical interventions are not contrary to faith. Jesus healed the sick and valued human life. The New Testament does not suggest that Christians should refuse medical care or interventions.
It is you can't escape your murderous conduct and the fact that your claims of infallibility and your necromancy makes you fit the deuteronomy 18 description of a false prophet not us we can all see your shameless projection even if you ate too brain damaged to see the obvious
ReplyDeleteThat you can't see that there is no comparison at all between the merciless killing of millions which all the churches of christendom have indulged and the by comparison far more minor missteps of JEHOVAH'S Servants makes it clear that your churches teachings cause brain damage and anyone whose brain has not been eaten by the absurdities your church teaches will see that,it's so obvious
ReplyDeleteThere is no unity in the Catholic church you allow those living in open defiance of JEHOVAH'S Law to preach and teach from your pulpit you murder one another on an industrial scale at the behest of corrupt politicians,what unity are you talking about? And there will never be unity in any of the churches if christendom because you disregarded the Lord's clear instruction to stay out if politics,those who think themselves smarter that JEHOVAH Invariably end up outsmarting themselves
ReplyDeleteThe Bible is clear believers are not to attempt communication with the dead,in ancient Israel this sin was punishable by death,
ReplyDeleteDeuteronomy ch.18:9-11NIV"When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. 10Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. "
It is clearly your church that is violation of Deuteronomy ch.18:9-11 not JEHOVAH'S Servants.
The church tolerated mass murderers as members in good standing rather than expelling them and used the powerful members to suppress religious minorities ,see Russia as an examples, Christ makes it clear that his true disciples will not tolerate such barbarism at times the church celebrated these thugs, clearly ALL ,again I don't want you to think I'm singling your church out or in any way implying that it was the worst offender,there us plenty of guilt to go around here.
ReplyDeleteThe claim that the Church “celebrated thugs” grossly misrepresents historical reality. The Church has canonized countless saints who lived lives of heroic virtue and self-sacrifice. Meanwhile, individuals who acted violently or unjustly were often rebuked or excommunicated. For example, during the Crusades, the Church condemned atrocities committed by Crusaders that went beyond their mandate, such as the sack of Constantinople in 1204. The Church today openly acknowledges past failures by its members. Pope John Paul II famously asked forgiveness for sins committed by Catholics throughout history, including violence and intolerance. This humility and willingness to seek reconciliation demonstrate the Church's commitment to Christ’s teachings.
DeleteThe claim that the Church “tolerated mass murderers as members in good standing” misunderstands the nature of ecclesiastical discipline. While the Church can excommunicate members for grave sins, it also recognizes the possibility of repentance. The goal of excommunication is not punishment but reconciliation with God. In historical contexts, individuals in positions of power who committed atrocities may have avoided excommunication due to political pressures or a lack of evidence. However, this does not imply endorsement by the Church.
Your critique relies on Donatist reasoning, which argues that the Church's legitimacy is invalidated by the sins of its members. The Catholic Church rejects this heresy, teaching that the Church remains holy because its foundation is Christ, not human perfection. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “The Church, clasping sinners to her bosom, at once holy and always in need of purification, follows constantly the path of penance and renewal” (CCC 827). Jesus never promised that the Church would be free from sin. Instead, he established a Church to be a means of salvation despite the weaknesses of its members: “You are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18). The Church’s mission is to proclaim the Gospel and administer the sacraments, not to act as a tribunal of perfection.
In conclusion, the Catholic Church does not celebrate or condone barbarism or violence. While individual Catholics have committed grievous sins, these acts reflect human failure, not the Church’s teachings. The critique relies on a flawed understanding of Church history and a Donatist perspective that judges the Church by the actions of sinful members. The Church’s true mission remains rooted in Christ’s command to love, forgive, and seek reconciliation, as demonstrated by its consistent teachings and the lives of countless saints.
The Bible is clear the tolerating of those who murder among you makes you guilty of the blood they spilt worse yet many if those encouraging the murder do so from your pulpit,those encouraging sexual immorality do so from your pulpits,one has to be utterly deluded to think that Christ and his God will take pleasure with that,
DeleteYou like these religious leaders the prophet condemns in malachi ch.1:6-8NIV"“A son honors his father, and a slave his master. If I am a father, where is the honor due me? If I am a master, where is the respect due me?” says the Lord Almighty.
“It is you priests who show contempt for my name.
“But you ask, ‘How have we shown contempt for your name?’
7“By offering defiled food on my altar.
“But you ask, ‘How have we defiled you?’
“By saying that the Lord’s table is contemptible. 8When you offer blind animals for sacrifice, is that not wrong? When you sacrifice lame or diseased animals, is that not wrong? Try offering them to your governor! Would he be pleased with you? Would he accept you?” says the Lord Almighty."
Like those religious leaders you disrespect JEHOVAH By suggesting he is bound to accept whatever low quality offering we make, JEHOVAH is a great king and oppression and immorality are beneath him,he us not under any obligation to accept any latreo from those who persists in dishonored him by tolerating pass murder and immorality living among them, and I'm always amazed those who try to terrorise their flocks with the threat if eternal torture would accuse us of being high control because we insists on JEHOVAH'S standard re:those making a dedication that they be ready to accept JEHOVAH'S Penalty beforehand and thus not take the oath frivolously. All one has to do is not take the oath and one will not have to worry about the sanction but whether one takes the catholic oath or not one is still in danger of Eternal torture according to your doctrine.
You tolerate abomination among members and even clergy it is obvious that you have been rejected by JEHOVAH Who makes it clear that the wicked must be removed if the entire church us not to be judge as wicked,
ReplyDelete1Corinthians ch.5:6-8NIV"1Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? 7Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."
The whole church us guilty before JEHOVAH if those living in open defiance of JEHOVAH'S Law are Tolerated among us ,christendom allows degenerates to teach from pulpit,making herself like eli in 1 Samuel 2:30 NIV"“Therefore the LORD, the God of Israel, declares: ‘I promised that members of your family would minister before me forever.’ But now the LORD declares: ‘Far be it from me! Those who honor me I will honor, but those who despise me will be disdained.“ Eli failed to expel his corrupt sons from the clergy JEHOVAH made it clear that he was going to put up with that as I explained if you can't demonstrate from the Bible itself do not bother your assertion us a reason to not believe rather than the opposite so either you demonstrate from scripture you remain Silent don't was space asserting based on a non-existent authority.
I'm not just talking about history but about the present all of Christendom’s armies chaplains there to justify killing if fellow humans to the soldiers, during the both world wars the churches were among the top recruiters in the colonial wars the churches egged on the colonizers seeing those wars as a necessary plowing of the ground for their missionary efforts.
ReplyDeleteDuring the Opium wars many church men urged on the conquerors justifying the bloodletting as a necessary prelude to the missionary work.
By the fruit the tree is known peace and brotherhood cannot come from Satan and bloodstained anarchy and oppression are not from Christ, the fact that brothers have rather go to their death, a death often at the hands of church members in good standing with not so much of a rebuke from church authority proves conclusively to anyone whose brain has not been broken by indoctrination who is being led by the Spirit of JEHOVAH and who is under the control of the prince of darkness. You can't receive forgiveness because first there must be admission of guilt before there can be the necessary heartfelt repentance over sin that precedes forgiveness.
ReplyDeleteThere are no numbers at all showing your claim that those who opt for bloodless medicine are more likely to die your continuing to repeat this lie only confirms the diabolical nature of the Catholic church it has no problem using lies like it's true lord Satan the devil until you produce some numbers to back up this claim I am going to be forced to regard you as nothing but another lying propagandist so I expect to see some numbers backing up this accusation that bloodless medicine has higher mortality rate or a retraction in the absence of either I will consider my suspicion that you are bad faith actor who has no problems stooping to mendacities to make his pont confirmed,so either some statistics or a retraction of this extremely dishonest claim that bloodless medicine us less safe.
ReplyDeleteWhy no link to this study so that we can assess it our selves I suspect that this does not address the issue of bloodless techniques and there efficacy, that is what the issue is about,also
ReplyDeleteBloodless techniques lead to lower post operative complications. If you had evidence that bloodless techniques were less effective at saving lives we would have seen it by now there would be multiple links dealing specifically with bloodless surgery and it's lack of efficacy, but we both know that no such evidence exists liar.
My arguments rely on real world results ,results are all that matters your three headed demon God is not getting the results one should expect from the God of the Bible peace ,moral and religious purity while the Lord JEHOVAH is that is how true wisdom is known results not not confirmation from any discredited authority
ReplyDeleteIt must be clear what you are freely choosing an absolute dedication to JEHOVAH'S Cause,luke ch.14:26N8V"“If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple."
ReplyDeleteRevelation ch.2:10NIV"Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer. I tell you, the devil will put some of you in prison to test you, and you will suffer persecution for ten days. Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you life as your victor’s crown".
Even my own life is forfeit in JEHOVAH'S Cause,Only when you reach that level of conviction are you ready for baptism
Nice censorship :)
DeleteNo spamming I can't comment on your channel at all so remove the straw nincsnevem
DeleteThe argument claims that Luke 7:35 (“But wisdom is justified by all her children”) means that the success or failure of an institution must be judged purely by its results. However, this passage refers to how divine wisdom is ultimately vindicated through God's plan, not through immediate human success or failure. For example, the life of Christ, judged by earthly results (e.g., His crucifixion), might seem like failure to a skeptic. Yet, in God's wisdom, His death brought salvation to the world. John 15:8, cited in the argument, emphasizes bearing spiritual fruit, such as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, and faithfulness (Galatians 5:22–23). The Catholic Church has borne this fruit in its contributions to theology, education, charity, and the preservation of Scripture. While the Church has faced failures due to human imperfection, these cannot invalidate its divine mission.
ReplyDeleteThe argument insists that "results" determine the truth of theology, but this approach has significant problems. The Bible is filled with examples of God's work through fallible individuals and institutions. King David committed grave sins, yet he remained a man after God’s heart (1 Samuel 13:14). The Apostle Peter denied Christ three times, yet he became the rock upon which Christ built His Church (Matthew 16:18). Imperfection does not invalidate God’s work. Jehovah’s Witnesses themselves have poor “results” by this standard: The Watchtower Society has made false prophecies (e.g., predicting the world would end in 1914, 1925, and 1975). By their own logic, these repeated failures disqualify them as a faithful organization.
The argument equates “Christendom” with “mass murder and gross immorality,” ignoring the complexity of history and oversimplifying the Church’s role. While individuals and institutions within Christendom have committed wrongs, these actions do not represent the teaching or mission of the Church. For example, the Crusades and the Inquisition are often cited out of context or exaggerated to tarnish the Church. However, the Church has also condemned such abuses and sought reform. The Catholic Church has made immense contributions to society, including founding hospitals, universities, and charities. It has preserved and disseminated Scripture, developed Western law, and defended human dignity through its teachings on the sanctity of life and justice.
Jesus Himself ate with sinners and called them to conversion (Luke 5:32). The Church follows this example, seeking to reform sinners rather than immediately excluding them. The sacraments, particularly Confession, are available for this purpose. Accountability exists in the Church: Catholic canon law and pastoral practice include measures to address public sin and scandal. Clergy and teachers who defy Church teaching are subject to discipline and removal, as has been demonstrated in many cases.
Decades of scientific research demonstrate the life-saving efficacy of blood transfusions in surgery, trauma, and critical care. The Watchtower Society’s prohibition of transfusions has led to unnecessary suffering and death. The Bible does not prohibit blood transfusions: Jehovah’s Witnesses misinterpret passages like Acts 15:20, which forbids eating blood, to apply to transfusions. However, this prohibition was dietary and ritualistic, not medical. Transfusions are not equivalent to consuming blood.
Revelation 1:6 speaks of believers as “a kingdom and priests to serve His God and Father.” This does not mean that every individual can interpret Scripture independently or set up their own theological standards. Christ established the Church’s authority: Jesus gave authority to Peter and the apostles to teach, govern, and sanctify (Matthew 16:18–19; Matthew 18:18). The Catholic Church, as the apostolic Church, continues this mission under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Watchtower Society, claiming to be God’s sole organization, disregards historical Christianity and creates its own interpretations, leading to doctrinal errors and contradictions.
No spamming you are flirting with a ban nincsnevem.
DeleteGod not the institution promises results,and it us only proper that we expect the results that he himself promised
John ch.13:35NIV"By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”
This love is not the result of human effort but evidence of the grace of JEHOVAH True Jesus christ it is irrational to claim that Satan is able to achieve the results JEHOVAH Promised through his son and Satan can't
It is your church that claims infallibility and practices necromancy by receiving communication from dead people not us the fact remains that it is you who meet the Bible standard of false prophet, so this is more of you attempting to remove the straw of clumsy exegesis while ignoring the plank of necromancy and biblically defined false prophesy. Remove the plank from your eye first ,thr pkanknof mass murder and toleration of gross sin including necromancy is not to be compared to the straw of clumsy exegesis and human imperfection,the martyrs of the Church are cancelled out by the fact that the church has given at least as good as she has gotten. Eating with sinners is fine we don't judge those outside but once you've taken the vow of dedication you cannot simply go back to your vomit without consequences
Ecclesiastical ch.5:4-6NIV"When you make a vow to God, do not delay to fulfill it. He has no pleasure in fools; fulfill your vow. 5It is better not to make a vow than to make one and not fulfill it. 6Do not let your mouth lead you into sin. And do not protest to the temple messenger, “My vow was a mistake.” Why should God be angry at what you say and destroy the work of your hands? "
it is better to not vow than to vow and not pay you just keep repeating your evidence free assertion that bloodless medicine is less safe than transfusions it rings more and more hollow each time because we know how desperate you are for actual evidence and that it is only because your search keeps coming up empty that you have not produced any.
This has nothing to do with any body but us we understand baptism as a public declaration of ones intent to live a dedicated it seems that for the churches of christendom it is just a rite of passage,the numbers do not support your unsupported claim that bloodless medicine is less safe the fact that you can produce no numbers at all not even ill considered numbers that someone might mistake as supporting your claim speaks volume.the Bible promises fruit that glorifies JEHOVAH from those who truly are disciples of the risen christ ,clear evidence that his God and Father has indeed resurrected him.
ReplyDelete