@JWs, have you ever thought about this for a moment?

Jehovah's Witnesses are taught that the first resurrection (talked about in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17; Revelation 20:5) began from 1918.

See: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2007006

Notice how Jesus, in the Bible, defined the term "Resurrection" at John 5:25-28 saying that the dead will COME OUT of their tombs.

Posing a problem to the teaching, the Watchtower made this "resurrection" a SPIRITUAL resurrection, i.e. No one, except Jesus, sees it happening.

Does that take the problem away? Not a chance, it even makes matters worse!

Now, recall that Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe that a part of man lives when the body dies, or that a part of man can even live outside the body at all!

Recall again the standard that Jesus Himself set, according to the Bible, of how THAT resurrection would be like: NO BODY IN THE TOMB! EMPTY TOMB! (recall?)

Good.

Here are the questions:

1.) Judging by the standard Jesus, according to the Bible, set for resurrection, if paraventure the graves of Charles Taze Russell, Rutherford, Knorr, Franz, e.t.c are dug up, WILL THERE BE BONES OR ANY FORM OF DECAY? That is to say, are the graves of Charles Taze Russell, Judge Rutherford, Knorr and all the "resurrected" ones EMPTY??

If yes, does that mean that IF A BONE OR DECAY BE FOUND, it proves that:

a.) there was no resurrection in 1918,

b.) these men are not members of the "Anointed Class,"

c.) the Watchtower is false, OR

d.) all of the above.

2.) If the Tombs of these are NOT empty (i.e. If we find Bones and Decay), yet they resurrected. WHAT PART OF THEM WAS RESURRECTED?

I'm guessing you're a witness doubting your doctrine..... You've not started asking the big questions.

Anyway, this is how your argument will be flattened by a witness:
The "anointed class" will reside in heaven (spirit realm) to rule with Jesus and co. .... Not in flesh.
the ones that will "inhabit the earth" are the ones that will be in flesh.

Swagalord18: I'm guessing you're a witness doubting your doctrine..... You've not started asking the big questions.

Anyway, this is how your argument will be flattened by a witness:
The "anointed class" will reside in heaven (spirit realm) to rule with Jesus and co. .... Not in flesh.
the ones that will "inhabit the earth" are the ones that will be in flesh.

You don't get it yet, do you?

I pointed out they believe that this "anointed class" was resurrected SPIRITUALLY. (please always read well and understand a post before you reply ok?)

the question is:

** ARE the "anointed class" resurrected?

WT answers: Yes, from 1918.

* JUST AS the Bible reports of an empty tomb resulting from Jesus' resurrection, if I dig up the grave of Charles T. Russell, Rutherford, Knorr, Franz, e.t.c, will I find it EMPTY??

* IF I DO FIND it occupied by Bones and Decay, WHAT WAS RESURRECTED??

Note that: by belief, NO PART of man lives OUTSIDE the body. So how can the decaying/decayed BODY be in the Grave WHILE a SPIRIT being belonging to that SAME person is heaven. What brought about that separation?

P.S: I'm not a Witness ok?

Reiyvinn: (please always read well and understand a post before you reply ok?)

This sentence ends my posts on this thread.
You seek word-exchange more than you seek answers.
I prefer a civilized argument.

Swagalord18:
This sentence ends my posts on this thread.
You seek word-exchange more than you seek answers.
I prefer a civilized argument.

Absolute nonsense.

You really need to keep your arrogance in check bro, it has obviously made you believe you can read minds.

First you said that I AM a witness in doubt of my religion, now you're saying that I'm seeking word exchange (both of which I'm not!)

if you really don't want to be a part of this thread, you're absolutely free to leave and give way for others to come in and don't use this as a means to evade, ok?

I could not finish the article. however, the little I read pissed me off.
The write could not differentiate between 'raising from the dead' a temporary miracle (Those who are raised still died) and Resurrection a permanent miracle. Jesus was resurrected and needs to die no more, others were raised from the dead including Lazarus. The first was raised in earthly body; the other in a spiritual body that can pass through a wall. See the rest from 1 Cor. 15: 40 - end
The inability to make this distinction make nonsense of the article.

MightySparrow: I could not finish the article. however, the little I read pissed me off.
The write could not differentiate between 'raising from the dead' a temporary miracle (Those who are raised still died) and Resurrection a permanent miracle. Jesus was resurrected and needs to die no more, others were raised from the dead including Lazarus. The first was raised in earthly body; the other in a spiritual body that can pass through a wall. See the rest from 1 Cor. 15: 40 - end
The inability to make this distinction make nonsense of the article.

What is the problem with you Nairalanders? Well, you said it yourself: YOU DIDN'T READ THE ARTICLE!

Where did I make mention of any miracle or of "raising from the dead"?

First it was Swagalord18 now you? Are you guys dyslexic or something?

What nonsense!!!!

According to the Bible, Jesus died, resurrected and his tomb was EMPTY! Yes, EMPTY!!

(are you now getting the message?)

the Watchtower claims that the resurrection of dead "anointed" christians started since 1918.

The question is ARE THE GRAVES OF C.T RUSSELL, RUTHERFORD, E.T.C EMPTY; WITHOUT BONES OR DECAY AT IT WAS WITH JESUS (whom the Bible calls "firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18))?!?!?!??

You guys should READ an article, get the message, and stop annoying people by responding to what the article didn't say in the first place. PLEASE!

@ reiyvinn:

My take (not quoting any Watchtower article o):

Not all spiritual resurrections have to have an empty tomb. Jesus' resurrection was one of a kind - simply because the disciples need the evidence of the empty tomb to prove he had really been raised up

I don't know if you are a christian, but if you are, the same question can be asked of you. If you believe that people receive their reward in heaven immediately they die, why are the graves of pastors and sincere Christians not empty? After all Paul said that Christians are United into a death like Jesus' and enjoy a resurrection like his.

"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection"

Romans 6:3-5 KJV

honeychild: @ reiyvinn:

My take (not quoting any Watchtower article o):

Not all spiritual resurrections have to have an empty tomb. Jesus' resurrection was one of a kind - simply because the disciples need the evidence of the empty tomb to prove he had really been raised up

I don't know if you are a christian, but if you are, the same question can be asked of you. If you believe that people receive their reward in heaven immediately they die, why are the graves of pastors and sincere Christians not empty? After all Paul said that Christians are United into a death like Jesus' and enjoy a resurrection like his.

"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection"

Romans 6:3-5 KJV

*SIGH* finally, one that understands the thread. Really appreciate the politeness in your reply and more, the fact that you actually put forth your OWN perspective. That's great!

That notwithstanding, your point, though tackling exactly what I raised in the thread, doesn't have any backing. For instance you said:

Not all spiritual resurrections have to have an empty tomb.

This has no backing in the Bible. On the contrary, Jesus, in the Bible, defined that resurrection as this:

"Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live. . . for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear his voice AND COME OUT -- those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection condemnation." (John 5:25-29).

That's pretty clear.

Paul, according to the Bible, further made it clear that the final Resurrection would be LIKE that of Jesus (whom he referred to as "firstborn from the dead" when he said:

"But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep."

Now answer this question: If the bones and decay are still in their graves AND their spirit beings are in heaven at the same time, how can this be if, according to the Watchtower, no part of man lives OUTSIDE his body? What brought about the separation: decaying body in the grave, spirit being in heaven?? Isn't that prototypical to the after-life preached by pastors which the Watchtower calls "pagan"??

And replying to your question:

I don't know if you are a christian, but if you are, the same question can be asked of you. If you believe that people receive their reward in heaven immediately they die, why are the graves of pastors and sincere Christians not empty? After all Paul said that Christians are United into a death like Jesus' and enjoy a resurrection like his.

These "pastors" believe that the Soul leaves the body and goes to heaven. Even if they are wrong, theirs is more plausible than the Watchtower's since their position makes allowance for body in the grave AND spirit in heaven (which the Watchtower's doesn't).

Reyvinn:

I think John 5:28,29 was referring to the second, physical resurrection into a paradise earth. If you are aware, the Bible teaches a large scale resurrection in which all the dead,"the unrighteous and the righteous" will rise up. This is different from the first spiritual resurrection of the annointed.

The fact that this second resurrurection is physical is borne out by the fact that Revelation says: The sea gave up the dead in it (drowned people) and death and Hell (the grave) gave up the dead. And they were JUDGED. - Rev 20:13.

The members of the annointed class cannot be part of this resurrection. Theirs must have come first because they take part in the Judging as brothers and co-rulers
of Christ.

"Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?"- 1 Cor 6:2.

"Revelation 20:6 - Blessed and Holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power.......and they shall reign with Christ a thousand years." KJV


To be completely honest with you, beyond the fact that the Bible talks about two resurrections, a first spiritual one and a second physical one, I cannot attempt to be dogmatic about dates and times.

JW people they get problem like


Before 1914, the Watchtower Society predicted that the Second Coming of Jesus would happen in 1914.

As usual now.. Fake prophecies. 1914 came and went, nothing of such happened..

Then they later postponed JC's Second Coming to a later year which also failed.

They circumvented the embarrassment by saying Jesus actually came back in 1914, only in the spiritual form mo ko la abi? (u see mark for my face abi)


As if such thing never happened, JW continue to exist/grow.

honeychild: Reyvinn:

I think John 5:28,29 was referring to the second, physical resurrection into a paradise earth. If you are aware, the Bible teaches a large scale resurrection in which all the dead,"the unrighteous and the righteous" will rise up. This is different from the first spiritual resurrection of the annointed.

The fact that this second resurrurection is physical is borne out by the fact that Revelation says: The sea gave up the dead in it (drowned people) and death and Hell (the grave) gave up the dead. And they were JUDGED. - Rev 20:13.

The members of the annointed class cannot be part of this resurrection. Theirs must have come first because they take part in the Judging as brothers and co-rulers
of Christ.

"Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?"- 1 Cor 6:2.

"Revelation 20:6 - Blessed and Holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power.......and they shall reign with Christ a thousand years." KJV


To be completely honest with you, beyond the fact that the Bible talks about two resurrections, a first spiritual one and a second physical one, I cannot attempt to be dogmatic about dates and times.

Now you are reading eisegesis into the text and in a way deviating from the point raised. I love the write-up tho, really nice, but it'd have been nicer if it did nail the point.

Firstly, Jesus didn't "SOME DEAD" but "THE DEAD" (in other words, whether it is "spiritual" or "physical" [which is debatable], Jesus, according to the Bible, said that they will COME OUT of their graves)

that is to say, if NO PART of man lives OUTSIDE the body, then for spiritual resurrection to be possible, the body has to be TRANSFORMED into a "spirit." and if that is the case, the bodies of men are not meant to be in their graves since their bodies have been TRANSFORMED into spirits...... Apart from that, having a body buried in a grave and a spirit belonging to that body in heaven would mean that a part of man DOES live OUTSIDE the body.

Reiyvinn: Apart from that, having a body buried in a grave and a spirit belonging to that body in heaven would mean that a part of man DOES live OUTSIDE the body.

And JW people no endorse beliefs like this

Reiyvinn:

Firstly, Jesus didn't "SOME DEAD" but "THE DEAD" (in other words, whether it is "spiritual" or "physical" [which is debatable], Jesus, according to the Bible, said that they will COME OUT of their graves)

Read Revelation 20:6. It first talks about a ''First Resurrection' who will sit on thrones with Christ and judge.

""Blessed and holy is he who hath part in the FIRST RESURRECTION''. on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and Christ and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Revelation 20:13 - And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
- this is the SECOND resurrection to which John 5:28,29 refers.

Like I said, I know Watchtower publications may have said this first resurrection started in 1918/1919. They may have been wrong. I don't know. But I do know the Bible says there are two resurrections. That for me is the meat and substance of the matter.

honeychild:

Read Revelation 20:6. It first talks about a ''First Resurrection' who will sit on thrones with Christ and judge.

""Blessed and holy is he who hath part in the FIRST RESURRECTION''. on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and Christ and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Revelation 20:13 - And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
- this is the SECOND resurrection to which John 5:28,29 refers.

*Sigh* You're not getting the point, are you?

I didn't say THERE IS NO second resurrection. What I said was that in John 5:25-29, Jesus was referring to resurrection IN GENERAL, not first or second. That is: whether first or second, they will COME OUT of their graves when they hear Jesus' voice.

Like I said, I know Watchtower publications may have said this first resurrection started in 1918/1919. They may have been wrong. I don't know. But I do know the Bible says there are two resurrections. That for me is the meat and substance of the matter.

Whether they were wrong or not is what we are deciding here.

If I dig up those tombs, will I find decay?

If no, then they must have been transformed into spirit beings and taken into heaven.

If yes, then either they never resurrected at all or their spirit left the body there in the grave. . . Either ways, they're wrong.

And if they're wrong, how then can this statement be justified:

". . . Jehovah's Organization, alone, in all the earth is directed by God's spirit or active force." (Watchtower July 1, 1978. Page 402)

Being wrong is not on its own evidence that God's spirit is not directing a group of people.

Example with the first century christians. Sometimes they were wrong e.g. on the issue of circumcision. The book of Acts covers the story of how some of the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem werr insisting that Gentile Christians had to be circumcised. There was a huge debate. How was the matter settled? NOT BY A VOICE FROM HEAVEN STATING WHAT GOD'S WILL IS.

The brothers taking the lead then had to discern God"s will from

1. The scriptures and
2. The evidence around them.

When everybody had debated and they had reached an agreement, they were sure the Holy Spirit had led them to it.

LONG STORY SHORT: When the Watchtower says Jehovah's people alone are being led by the Holy Spirit, what it means is that we alone try to stick as closely as possible to what the Bible says.......not that those in charge hear the voice of God dictating his will to them.

And the fact that we are ever ready to change our belief if the Bible shows us to be wrong is a sign of humility - another fruit of God's Holy Spirit.

honeychild: Being wrong is not on its own evidence that God's spirit is not directing a group of people.

Example with the first century christians. Sometimes they were wrong e.g. on the issue of circumcision. The book of Acts covers the story of how some of the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem werr insisting that Gentile Christians had to be circumcised. There was a huge debate. How was the matter settled? NOT BY A VOICE FROM HEAVEN STATING WHAT GOD'S WILL IS.

The brothers taking the lead then had to discern God"s will from

1. The scriptures and
2. The evidence around them.

When everybody had debated and they had reached an agreement, they were sure the Holy Spirit had led them to it.

LONG STORY SHORT: When the Watchtower says Jehovah's people alone are being led by the Holy Spirit, what it means is that we alone try to stick as closely as possible to what the Bible says.......not that those in charge hear the voice of God dictating his will to them.

And the fact that we are ever ready to change our belief if the Bible shows us to be wrong is a sign of humility - another fruit of God's Holy Spirit.

Now, here is the problem with what you said.

The disciples HAD NOT established any position as "truth from the Holy Spirit" UNTIL the disagreement was settled and an agreement reached. It was the FINAL result that became established as "truth from the Holy Spirit."

But as for the Watchtower, EVERY literature published is inspired by the Holy Spirit: Including the error filled ones!

"We will also increase our joy if we prayerfully and diligently study God's spirit-inspired Word AND Christian publications prepared under the spirit's guidance. " (Watchtower March 12, 1992 pp. 21-22)

" The Watchtower is not the instrument of any man or set of men, nor is it published according to the whims of men. No man's opinion is expressed in the Watchtower. God feeds his own people . . ." (Watchtower November 1, 1931 p. 327)

And here comes the bombshell:

" We see no reason for changing the figures - nor could we change them if we could. They are, we believe, God's date not ours. " (Watchtower July 15, 1894 p. 266, p 1677 reprints)

Now by saying that they "could be wrong" you are actually saying "God could be wrong" and even face the judicial committee for it.

The apostles' disagreement about a teaching wasn't like this:

1.) God says it is A.

2.) God says it is B.

3.) God inspired us the WHOLE time.

If God inspired them the whole time, then that would mean that God is wrong and doesn't know what he's saying. But the apostles did it like this:

1.) Research on A

2.) Research on B

3.) Come to a common Conclusion and call it "Inspired."

So your current position is:

"Being wrong isn't a problem, we grow in God's word."

But the terrible problems it pose for you are:

1.) Watchtower said they are from God, not from man.

(either they lied or God lied)

2.) JWs were made to believe that they were from God; many of whom went to their graves believing they were God's teachings.

(upon change, it is apparent that those JWs died believing the wrong thing that was not from God)

3.) Watchtower still claims to be God's mouthpiece with which Jehovah transmits his words to JWs.

4.) If after you die years later and then they change their teachings, and regard today's teachings as "Christendom" "Pagan" "Babylonish" e.t.c, it means You died believing in pagan, christendom and babylonish teachings!!

They've done it before with:

* Cross, then Stake.

* Jesus: not Michael, then Michael.

* Christmas, Birthdays, e.t.c: Okay, then not okay.

* Blood transfusion: No fraction allowed, then some fraction allowed.

(Just as people died believing the former was "truth from God," you may die believing the latter is "truth from God BUT the former "truth from God" is now regarded by the Watchtower as a Christendom lie, what makes you think that the latter "truth from God," which you now believe, won't be regarded as a pagan, Christendom lie later after you must have died believing it like the past JWs?)

See? The problem is huge!

Reiyvinn:

But as for the Watchtower, EVERY literature published is inspired by the Holy Spirit: Including the error filled ones!

!

Not true.

."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? Arethey not seeking to set up a falsehood to give themselves excuse for making
attacks?
- Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 September 1909. 

When the Watchtower says it is God's mouthpiece, or speaking for God, this is what it simply means: As Jehovah's people, we go out to declare God's message AS CONTAINED IN THE BIBLE.

We do not believe God has any additional messages outside what the Bible contains. The Faithful slave has always been quick to admit to their fallibility.


.“The brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers.(2 Tim. 3:16) And so, at times, it has been necessary, as understanding
became clearer, to correct views. (Prov. 4:18)” (February 15, 1981, page 19)

Reiyvinn:
They've done it before with
* Cross, then Stake.
* Jesus: not Michael, then Michael.
* Christmas, Birthdays, e.t.c: Okay, then not okay.

Stop being deliberately obtuse! I thought you were smarter than this. But anyway this is how it went,

1. Like every other Christian group, the early Bible students believed in the cross. They also celebrated Christmas and birthdays because that's what they had always done.

2. Due to their studies in the scriptures they discovered the pagan origins of these practices.AND STOPPED THEM. Unlike today's "men of God" who persist in these practices despite knowing it's antecedents. Have you observed the parade of pastors on Christmas day who recite the "yes we know Christmas is not biblical but....

.

Reiyvinn:
* Blood transfusion: No fraction allowed, then some fraction allowed.
!

I don't think there have always been blood fractions - I am not sure so correct me if I am wrong. But I think blood fractions are a relatively modern development. So its not a case of going back and forth. It's a case of applying Bible principles to new situations. In a bid to avoid going beyond what is written, the decision on fractions was left for an individual to decide. Remember the fact that it's a conscience matter doesn't mean all Jehovah's Witnesses accept it. It just means you decide whether to accept or not.

honeychild:

Not true.

."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? Arethey not seeking to set up a falsehood to give themselves excuse for making
attacks?
- Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 September 1909. 

Wow, there you have a contradiction.

The Watchtower, as I earlier quoted, stated that those publications were prepared under guidance from God's spirit and that those dates were God's dates NOT THEIRS!

In other words, it's no longer a matter of THEIR infallibility but GOD'S infallibility. Unless, those dates were NEVER God's dates and those publications were NEVER prepared under the guidance of God's spirit, then we'd be talking of something entirely different.

God, according to the Bible, DOES NOT change his mind (Numbers 23:13), so there is NO WAY he inspired them THEN to write what they wrote and still inspires them NOW in writing what they now write. It's either they got it right then (i.e. Inspiration from God) and are now wrong (i.e. Inspiration not from God) OR they got it wrong then (i.e. Inspiration not from God) and are now right (i.e. Inspiration) OOOR were wrong in both places! (i.e. Inspiration never from God).

You can't have them "God's spirit directed then" and "God's spirit directed now." It has to be one or none.

Remember what the Bible says about being God's spirit directed? "The words you will speak will not be yours but the Holy Spirit's" (Mark 13:13)

When the Watchtower says it is God's mouthpiece, or speaking for God, this is what it simply means: As Jehovah's people, we go out to declare God's message AS CONTAINED IN THE BIBLE.

Then it would be nice if you told me where the following teachings come from:

1.) 1935 (a date where the selection of "heavenly class" stop)

2.) 1918 (a date where the "first resurrection" began)

4.) 1923: Beth Sarim.

5.) Organ Transplant = Cannibalism.

6.) Disciples not part of Faithful and Discreet Slave (Watchtower July 15, 2013 "new light".)

7.) 1919 Inspection. And many more!

Stop being deliberately obtuse! I thought you were smarter than this. But anyway this is how it went,

1. Like every other Christian group, the early Bible students believed in the cross. They also celebrated Christmas and birthdays because that's what they had always done.

2. Due to their studies in the scriptures they discovered the pagan origins of these practices.AND STOPPED THEM. Unlike today's "men of God" who persist in these practices despite knowing it's antecedents. Have you observed the parade of pastors on Christmas day who recite the "yes we know Christmas is not biblical but....

Now that's the point I was making. They endulged in the "pagan" practices, some JWs died believing it was OK to celebrate them and even celebrated them in their life.

What would God's judgment be on those who died believing, practising and teaching these "pagan" "christendom" and "babylonian" practices?

We'll they be resurrected or not?

Don't forget that God, according to the Bible, is NOT partial.

Think about this, according to the Watchtower, Jesus INSPECTED AND APPROVED the Watchtower at 1919. What DID HE APPROVED OF in the Watchtower?

By then, they hadn't done away with most of these "pagan" teachings. So did Jesus INSPECT them and APPROVE of them while they practised/taught these things?

I don't think there have always been blood fractions - I am not sure so correct me if I am wrong. But I think blood fractions are a relatively modern development. So its not a case of going back and forth. It's a case of applying Bible principles to new situations. In a bid to avoid going beyond what is written, the decision on fractions was left for an individual to decide. Remember the fact that it's a conscience matter doesn't mean all Jehovah's Witnesses accept it. It just means you decide whether to accept or not.

Wow! You guys surprise me!

At first the Watchtower says blood transfusion IS BAD! Later it became fraction. Now a conscience matter?

What was the REAL and ORIGINAL direction from God's spirit?

If We are to ABSTAIN from blood, how can it be a CONSCIENCE matter at the same time

Ok, how should one abstain from fornication?? Is that also a matter of conscience?!

Or is it because people are dying rampantly that they decided to take a shift??

Imagine a case whereby Adam and Eve are made to abstain from the Fruit at the middle of the garden (first rule) and then God says, ok you can extract the vitamin c but NOT the fruit (second rule) ONLY to later say "well, if you are ok with it, you can eat it." (third rule)

Does that make any sense to you?

@ Reyvinn

It appears in your haste to discredit Jehovah's Witnesses, you can't even calm down and understand a point before you jump into it with both feet? Okay o, let me break it down small small for you:

1. Jehovah's Witnesses did not invent blood fractions. Advances in medical sciences have made it possible to extract fractions from components of blood. We are to abstain from blood. We are also to abstain from the components of blood e.g white blood cells, red blood cells, platelets and plasma. But what about these tiny fractions that are extracted from blood - e.g. proteins like albumin. or certain hormones that may be extracted from blood? Those are not blood, so it will be stretching the command to abstain from blood to these ones. And in a bid to avoid being overly legalistic, the Governing Body has left it to the conscience of each individual witness. AND YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT? Come on, is this not a case of damned if you do, and damned if you don't? There is just no winning with you guys right?

Reiyvinn:
Unless, those dates were NEVER God's dates and those publications were NEVER prepared under the guidance of God's spirit, then we'd be talking of something entirely different.

You can keep screaming it till you are blue in the face, that won't make it true. The Governing Body is not inspired. They have not said they were inspired. No Jehovah's witness believes they are inspired. I know you would like for it to be true. But its not. This is what they have told you:

1. We are not inspired. We are not infallible. We make mistakes.

2. We study the Bible. We pray for Holy spirit to guide us. We teach what we have understood from our Bible study.

honeychild:
."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? Arethey not seeking to set up a falsehood to give themselves excuse for making
attacks?
- Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence, 15 September 1909. 

.“The brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers.(2 Tim. 3:16) And so, at times, it has been necessary, as understanding
became clearer, to correct views. (Prov. 4:18)” (February 15, 1981, page 19)

You need for them to be inspired so that you can keep your attacks up. Well if that's what rocks your boat keep on keeping on. We know the truth.

Reiyvinn:
Then it would be nice if you told me where the following teachings come from:
1.) 1935 (a date where the selection of "heavenly class" stop)

Why don't you actually read what Witnesses say and believe instead of regurgitating half truths from apostate websites? What has been said is this. In 1935,the emphasis shifted to gathering in members of the "earthly class"". How did the Jehovah's Witnesses discern this? Because a majority of those who were becoming Jehovah's Witnesses at the time did not express a ''heavenly hope''. In case you did not know this, no one tells a Jehovah's Witness where his hope is. It is strictly between you and your God. So if as more people are coming in, the majority express a earthly hope, then it is clear that is where the emphasis is. And so you know that the selection of the 'heavenly class' did not stop in 1935, Geritt Losch, a member of the governing body, was baptized in 1952.

Reiyvinn:

2.) 1918 (a date where the "first resurrection" began)
4.) 1923: Beth Sarim.
5.) Organ Transplant = Cannibalism.

They made mistakes. They have admitted it. They are trying not to make the same mistakes again. Get over it - cos we have!

Reiyvinn:
Now that's the point I was making. They endulged in the "pagan" practices, some JWs died believing it was OK to celebrate them and even celebrated them in their life.
What would God's judgment be on those who died believing, practising and teaching these "pagan" "christendom" and "babylonian" practices?
We'll they be resurrected or not?
?

Why don't we leave the judgement to God?

“there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.” - Acts 24:15
"'True, God has overlooked the times of such ignorance; but now he is declaring to all people everywhere that they should repent.'" Acts 17:30

Reiyvinn:
Think about this, according to the Watchtower, Jesus INSPECTED AND APPROVED the Watchtower at 1919. What DID HE APPROVED OF in the Watchtower?

They were seeking first God's kingdom. They were proclaiming God's kingdom as a real government with Jesus Christ as King - not as a good feeling in your heart like the other churches. They were ''keeping no part of this world'" and not taking part in warfare and politics - again unlike their counterparts in other churches.

Bros, or lady, I am done here. I know I can never convince you. I just wanted to give you an answer for the sake of my Christian brothers and sisters who may be reading your posts. Have a good life. Peace.

How can a "SIN" be of a matter of conscience to a believer? I observed that you avoided the last question I asked so I'll ask it again:

Reiyvinn: What was the REAL and ORIGINAL direction from God's spirit?

If We are to ABSTAIN from blood, how can it be a CONSCIENCE matter at the same time

Ok, how should one abstain from fornication?? Is that also a matter of conscience?!

Or is it because people are dying rampantly that they decided to take a shift??

Imagine a case whereby Adam and Eve are made to abstain from the Fruit at the middle of the garden (first rule) and then God says, ok you can extract the vitamin c but NOT the fruit (second rule) ONLY to later say "well, if you are ok with it, you can eat it." (third rule)

Does that make any sense to you?

I sincerely wish, if you've read it to this point, to first of all ignore all the bias for a moment and think about this... Ok?

We are to abstain from blood. We are also to abstain from the components of blood e.g white blood cells, red blood cells, platelets and plasma. But what about these tiny fractions that are extracted from blood - e.g. proteins like albumin. or certain hormones that may be extracted from blood? Those are not blood, so it will be stretching the command to abstain from blood to these ones. And in a bid to avoid being overly legalistic, the Governing Body has left it to the conscience of each individual witness. AND YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT? Come on, is this not a case of damned if you do, and damned if you don't? There is just no winning with you guys right?

Now take a look at this:

The fact that serums are prepared from blood makes them undesirable to Christians because of the Biblical law against the use of blood. However, since they do not involve the use of blood as a food to nourish the body, which the Bible directly forbids, their use is a matter that must be decided by each person according to his conscience. (Awake! 22nd August 1965 p18)

But..... JWs are FORBIDDEN to store or donate blood:

Consequently, the removal of one's blood, storing it and later putting it back into the same person would be a violation of the Scriptural principles that govern the handling of blood....if the blood were stored, even for a brief period of time, this would be a violation of the Scriptures... Again, if one's own blood would have to be withdrawn at intervals and stored until a sufficient amount had accumulated to set a machine in operation, this too would fall under Scriptural prohibition. (The Watchtower 15 October 1959, p640)

Now ask yourself: Where are these fractions extracted from? From the blood of pagan, christendom, bablyonish believers who disregard "God"'s sacred "law" -- Without whom there would be limited blood fractions to help "obedient" JWs with thus, mass DEATH!!!!

No wonder many JWs are beginning to seek a reform in the murderous doctrine; see AJWRB.ORG

To be continued. . .

You can keep screaming it till you are blue in the face, that won't make it true. The Governing Body is not inspired. They have not said they were inspired. No Jehovah's witness believes they are inspired. I know you would like for it to be true. But its not. This is what they have told you:

1. We are not inspired. We are not infallible. We make mistakes.

2. We study the Bible. We pray for Holy spirit to guide us. We teach what we have understood from our Bible study.



You need for them to be inspired so that you can keep your attacks up. Well if that's what rocks your boat keep on keeping on. We know the truth.

You still ain't getting the point. *SIGH*

I really wish you'd just make this less personal and let you brain power work a bit.

Let's define the word "INSPIRATION":

According to Bible, being directed, stimulated, moved and influenced by the Holy Spirit, is to be Inspired by God.

As I earlier quoted, the Watchtower claims directions from God. Even to the point of saying:

"It is vital that we appreciate this fact and respond to the directions of the "slave" as we would to the voice of God, because it is His provision ." (Watchtower 1957 Jun 15 p.370)

Think about this for a moment:

I make no implication that individual members of Jehovah's Organization need to be infallible. As all humans are imperfect, God has always used imperfect humans, such as Moses, David and Paul. However, if God's Holy Spirit in the past inspired imperfect people to pen his perfect words infallibly in the Bible, and if his Holy Spirit is said to be directing Jehovah's people through the Watchtower in the same manner today, these directions are inspired and so must be infallible. If God's words are no longer infallible, then his current earthly channel is not being directed by Holy Spirit, as Jehovah's channel always has been. They should not demand unquestioning loyalty and do not have God's authority to strictly enforce obedience to Watchtower specific doctrinal interpretation.

Notice that though the older men of Jerusalem were fallible, their writings were inspired.

"It was referred to the apostles and older men at Jerusalem, who served as a central governing body. [b]Those older men were not infallible; they were not persons who never made a mistake. (Compare Galatians 2:11-14.) But God used them.[/b] They considered what the inspired Scriptures said on the subject at hand as well as the evidence of the operation of God's spirit in opening up the Gentile field, and then they rendered a decision. God blessed that arrangement." United in Worship p.120

Though the Bible writers were not infallible they were inspired, so everything they wrote in the Bible was infallible. The members of the Apostolic Governing Body were fallible, but as a body, they were inspired, so as a body their decisions, interpretations and writings were infallible. This is a significant difference. In fact, this is the crux of the matter and pivotal to understanding the truth to the premise behind the Watchtower Society. For the Governing Body to say that the Holy Spirit similarly guides their interpretations and appointments and yet they make mistakes must border on blasphemy. When the Holy Spirit directs a person, they do not get it wrong; otherwise, what was the point of the Holy Spirit's direction?

The Watchtower has no choice but to say that the Holy Spirit directs the Organization because this is a Biblical prophecy, and the way Jehovah's people were always directed:

"We are living also in the time of final fulfilment of the prophecy to which the apostle Peter referred on the day of Pentecost, namely: "It shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: and also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my Spirit." (Joel 2:28, 29)" (Watchtower 1958 Jan 15 p.45)

I hope you're getting the picture?

As written in the Bible, fallible men are used to do infallible things because it is not their doing but the doing of the one using them and that was why I quoted Mark 13:13.

. . .What has been said is this. In 1935,the emphasis shifted to gathering in members of the "earthly class"". How did the Jehovah's Witnesses discern this? Because a majority of those who were becoming Jehovah's Witnesses at the time did not express a ''heavenly hope''. In case you did not know this, no one tells a Jehovah's Witness where his hope is. It is strictly between you and your God. So if as more people are coming in, the majority express a earthly hope, then it is clear that is where the emphasis is. And so you know that the selection of the 'heavenly class' did not stop in 1935, Geritt Losch, a member of the governing body, was baptized in 1952.

Sorry to be blunt but this is a blatant lie (I'm not saying that you are intentionally lying but what you just said is completely false):

"Hence, especially after 1966 it was believed that the heavenly call ceased in 1935. " (Watchtower 2007 May 1 p.30)

Well, I forgot to even state that they even had a "new light":

"As time has gone by, some Christians baptized after 1935 have had witness borne to them that they have the heavenly hope. Thus we cannot set a specific date for when the heavenly hope ends." (Watchtower 2007 May 1 p.31)

So, the problem remains, "What is/are the criterion on which the Anointed are chosen?"

It appears you did the answering yourself:

In case you did not know this, no one tells a Jehovah's Witness where his hope is. It is strictly between you and your God.

But the new problem created is: How then do they identify those to be chosen as part of the Governing Body since, according to the Watchtower , can only come from the "Anointed Class"

They made mistakes.

Yes they do, we all do but this is not about them (please read my post again), it's about the "direction" they claimed to get from the Holy Spirit at that time they made the "mistakes." According to the Bible, God makes NO mistakes, so it is either they were NEVER directed by God's spirit as they claimed or the mistake is from God.... I'll leave that to you.

They have admitted it.

Well, good to hear. But, what was their admission? That they got it wrong, that it wasn't God's instruction they followed but theirs, that they were wrong for disfellowshipping those that disagreed with what they taught? Really?

Their admission was more or less like blaming their members for believing them. Snap! It was!!

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."

Here the governing body moves from just avoiding the responsibility to putting it on those who were disappointed when nothing happened in 1975. In saying that it is those who were disappointed that need to "adjust their viewpoint", they are laying the blame squarely on them. It is their viewpoint that needs adjusting, not that of the governing body that raised their expectations for a decade.

That July 15, 1976 article, while discussing Jesus words about not being weighed down with anxieties of life at Luke 21:34-36 said:

Did Jesus mean that we should adjust our financial and secular affairs so that our resources would just carry us to a certain date that we think marks the end? If our house is suffering serious deterioration, should we let it go, on the assumption that we would need it only a few months longer? Or, if someone in the family needs special medical care, should we say, "Well, we'll put it off because the time is so near for this system of things to go"? This is not the kind of thinking that Jesus advised.

One would have thought that apologizing was meant to be some sort of "admission from a godly set of people willing to have a change of heart toward the mistakes" but no. Raymond Franz, a former anointed GB said:

In 1976, a year after the passing of that widely publicized date, a few members of the Governing Body began urging that some statement should be made acknowledging that the organization had been in error, had stimulated false expectations. Others said they did not think we should, that it would “just give ammunition to opposers.” Milton Henschel recommended that the wise course would be simply not to bring the matter up and that in time the brothers would stop talking about it. There was clearly not enough support for a motion favoring a statement to carry. That year, an article in the July 15 Watchtower did refer to the failed expectations but the article had to conform to the prevailing sentiments within the Governing Body and no clear acknowledgement of the organization’s responsibility was possible. - Crisis of Conscience p 209

They are trying not to make the same mistakes again. Get over it - cos we have!

What makes you think they have? The JWs then all believed they won't make those mistakes again during the flip-flops then, what makes you think they won't now? What makes you believe that what you currently believe won't be regarded as Christendom later?

Why don't we leave the judgement to God?

“there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.” - Acts 24:15
"'True, God has overlooked the times of such ignorance; but now he is declaring to all people everywhere that they should repent.'" Acts 17:30



They were seeking first God's kingdom. They were proclaiming God's kingdom as a real government with Jesus Christ as King - not as a good feeling in your heart like the other churches. They were ''keeping no part of this world'" and not taking part in warfare and politics - again unlike their counterparts in other churches.

Bros, or lady, I am done here. I know I can never convince you. I just wanted to give you an answer for the sake of my Christian brothers and sisters who may be reading your posts. Have a good life. Peace.[/quote]


So did Mormons, Jehovah baptists, e.t.c. My dear, that is no excuse.

honeychild: Why don't you actually read what Witnesses say and believe instead of regurgitating half truths from apostate websites?

What makes you think I don't hear from JWs regarding this? Why trumpet this same old watchtower pre-programmed response? No offence.

I actually type my ideas, get others ideas and get the quotes (which I knew existed right from the outset) online. Where did you get your quotes, if I may ask? From your head?

[quote author=Reiyvinn post=26693477]

Jehovah's Witnesses are taught that the first resurrection
(talked about in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17; Revelation 20:5)
began from 1918.
See: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2007006

That it is a possibility, does not dogmatically mean that that statement is true.

We do know that the resurrection began during Christ's presence. We cant definitely state when it started. 1918 is still under probability.

Notice how Jesus, in the Bible, defined the term
"Resurrection" at John 5:25-28 saying that the dead will
COME OUT of their tombs.

Jesus was not defining resurrection in that verse. Resurrection has the thought of "raising up", not coming up. While the latter conveys the sense of stepping out, which can only be done by one who is alive, the former is about re-awakening.

Therefore, one can only come out from tomb after being reawoken.

Posing a problem to the teaching, the Watchtower made this
"resurrection" a SPIRITUAL resurrection, i.e. No one, except
Jesus, sees it happening.

It is not only Jesus who see it happen. Others, including the previously resurrected, God, Angels would see it happen.

Now, recall that Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe that a
part of man lives when the body dies, or that a part of man
can even live outside the body at all!
Recall again the standard that Jesus Himself set, according to
the Bible, of how THAT resurrection would be like: NO BODY
IN THE TOMB! EMPTY TOMB! (recall?)

Jesus didnt set that standard. You did.

Notice that the scripture didnt say just "tomb", but a "memorial tomb". The greek word used there conveys the sense of having a detailed information about a person. So those in God's memory is the one to be raised. It is not all who die is in there. It is God who knows those in this tomb, not humans. When you bury your dead in your grave, this does not mean that he is in God's memorial tomb. No. God knows all who are there, not humans.

And these tomb is not the physical grave you see, where you can go and check whether the person is there or not.

This answers your number 1 question. It is memorial tomb, not grave. These are two words with different meaning.

2.) If the Tombs of these are NOT empty (i.e. If we find
Bones and Decay), yet they resurrected. WHAT PART OF
THEM WAS RESURRECTED?

That article answered that question. In short, Paul himself answered that question. He asked, what body will the dead be coming up with. Let me quote the article;

In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul raises a
question about the first resurrection: “How are the dead to
be raised up? Yes, with what sort of body are they coming?”
He then answers the question: “What you sow is not made
alive unless first it dies . . . but God gives it a body just as it
has pleased him . . . The glory of the heavenly bodies is one
sort, and that of the earthly bodies is a different sort.”—
1 Corinthians 15:35-40 .

7 Paul’s words show that Christians anointed with holy
spirit must die before they can receive their heavenly reward.
At their death, their earthly body returns to the dust.
( Genesis 3:19 ) At God’s appointed time, they are resurrected
with a body of a kind suitable for life in the heavens.

Compare that with what I said previously.

1. God has a record of our color, behavior and etc in His "memory". He also has the power to retore that one's life force, spirit.

2. Exod 32:33; Deut 29:20; Ps 69:28 shows that God has a figurative book where he "writes" our record. So, if he gives anyone a 'new body, just as He pleases' according to that 1 Corinthians, He can restore his/her identity He has in His book.

Yes, when you plant a seed, the seed dies before producing a body. And how its new body will look like is not determined by the seed, but God. So, during resurrection, God will give some heavenly bodies and some earthly bodies.

The heavenly class is sown "a physical body" and it is raised up "a spiritual body" 1Cor. 15:44.

Flesh and blood cant enter heaven, so God has nothing to do with that body that has been rotten in the grave. 1Cor. 15:50

By way of summary, God has all the information needed to re-create that dead person. He has our individual "memory cards". He destroys those of the wicked, thereby, blotting it off.

Reiyvinn:


Now you are reading eisegesis into the text and in a way deviating from the point raised. I love the write-up tho, really nice, but it'd have been nicer if it did nail the point.

Firstly, Jesus didn't "SOME DEAD" but "THE DEAD" (in other words, whether it is "spiritual" or "physical" [which is debatable], Jesus, according to the Bible, said that they will COME OUT of their graves)

that is to say, if NO PART of man lives OUTSIDE the body, then for spiritual resurrection to be possible, the body has to be TRANSFORMED into a "spirit." and if that is the case, the bodies of men are not meant to be in their graves since their bodies have been TRANSFORMED into spirits...... Apart from that, having a body buried in a grave and a spirit belonging to that body in heavenwould mean that a part of man DOES live OUTSIDE the body.

That on the red is a misconception of what the bible says in 1cor. 15.

The bible did not say it is the "spirit of the man" that goes to hevean at the resurrection to live, but that there are two types of body, the physical body(flesh and blood) and the spirit body(non physical). So, your statement on red about the resurrection above is not biblical.

That is, the individual will take on a new body, between the time of taking a new body, the person is dead, that is, "they will not remain in death", but they will die to put on the new body, though in "a twinkle of an eye".

Sort your understanding of the above in red out first, slowly.

See:

1cor. 15:35-42:

But someone will ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?"
36 How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies.
37 When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else.
38 But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body.
39 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another.
40 There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another.
41 The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.
42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable.

And

1cor.15:44:

it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

1cor.15:50-53:

I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.
51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed —
52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.
53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.

Easy on those, dont rush.

The "dead will be raise". Means they will all die first, then, God will give them another kind of body, without any of this body, they remain dead.

Hence, there is nothing like the "spirit in man" going somewhere like heaven to stay without a body (spiritual body if heaven bound).

Befor anything, those that are to go to haven must die first, then the dead will be raise and given a body.

That is what the bible says.

Peace.

*Editted*

Reiyvinn:


*Sigh* You're not getting the point, are you?

I didn't say THERE IS NO second resurrection. What I said was that in John 5:25-29, Jesus was referring to resurrection IN GENERAL, not first or second. That is: whether first or second, they will COME OUT of their graves when they hear Jesus' voice.



Whether they were wrong or not is what we are deciding here.

If I dig up those tombs, will I find decay?

If no, then they must have been transformed into spirit beings and taken into heaven.

If yes, then either they never resurrected at all or their spirit left the body there in the grave. . . Either ways, they're wrong.

And if they're wrong, how then can this statement be justified:

". . . Jehovah's Organization, alone, in all the earth is directed by God's spirit or active force." (Watchtower July 1, 1978. Page 402)

Why will you not see the bones of those that have gone to heaven in the grave ?

Is there any use for the bones in heaven ?

That the body of Jesus was not found in the grave is God that have the full answer as to why, just as he decided to hide the body of Moses, can you please ask God why he hid the body of moses ?

That he hid the body of moses, does that mean he did the same with the body of all his faithful servants of old befor christ ?

So, tell me, why should the bones of heaven bound persons not be found in the grave, is there any need for it in heaven ?

Please, your answer.

Peace.

@relvin, you are raising intelligent questions I love that. Let me see how they would answer the questions.

@JMAN05 and truthislight I'm so sorry I've been away for quite a long time. Just saw the Mentions today.

It seems you guys misunderstood my point a bit but I'm quite happy you guy got it far better than the others who have been distorting what I actually meant. I'll be typing out a detailed response to that.

@PaulGrundy, thanks a lot.

Reiyvinn:
@JMAN05 and truthislight I'm so sorry I've been away for quite a long time. Just saw the Mentions today.

It seems you guys misunderstood my point a bit but I'm quite happy you guy got it far better than the others who have been distorting what I actually meant. I'll be typing out a detailed response to that.

Your argument hinge on the belief that "there is a spirit part of man that leaves the body at death to live in heaven", hence your questions asking if the body of those men that have died are not still in their graves.

Your argument implies that, the bodies of those dead men should not be in their grave if it is not their spirit that goes to live in heaven, hence their body should have gone to heaven and should not be found in their grave if the spirit does not go to live in heaven, since it is belief that they have gone to heaven.

For you to clarify anything further, you first have to consent that the above was not your argument or that it was your argument that you are now retracting. No muddling of things up will be entertained

If it was your argument and you still stand by it, we have to verify if that argument of yours is a bible based stance or it is an error as I think it is.

It is after this clarification that I will find your argument worthy of further attention or not.

There won't be need to banter further with you on this if your initial premise was in error, would it ?

Peace.

truthislight:


Your argument hinge on the belief that "there is a spirit part of man that leaves the body at death to live in heaven", hence your questions asking if the body of those men that have died are not still in their graves.

That's absolutely wrong. That's the misconcept from you both (you and JMAN05) that I intended to address. You don't assume a person's position, you get it from the texts or points tendered by the person. Moreover, it's not even about what I believe but what the Watchtower teaches regarding a supposed resurrection that took place in 1918.

Your argument implies that, the bodies of those dead men should not be in their grave if it is not their spirit that goes to live in heaven, hence their body should have gone to heaven and should not be found in their grave if the spirit does not go to live in heaven, since it is belief that they have gone to heaven.

Wrong again. My argument has NOTHING to do with what you just said. Let me rephrase it once again:

The whole think, like I said, is not about what I believe, so it is more or less a straw man to juxtapose what you think I believe into what you think my argument states..

According to the Watchtower's 1918 teaching, C. T. Russell, J. F. Rutherford and the other "anointed" who died around that time and further on were resurrected upon death to rule with Christ in heaven.

This places a huge implication because it would have been safer if the Watchtower believed in a sort of Spiritual man separating from the Physical man ELSE, the only VERIFIABLE way to know that these men are resurrected would be for their tombs have to be EMPTY. Which is exactly what Jesus (whom the Bible calls the "Firstborn from the dead",) demonstrated according to the Bible.

Since the Watchtower holds that the Physical Jesus was "dissolved" in other to give way for the Spiritual Jesus to resurrect, that is EXACTLY how the "spiritual resurrection" ought to be defined.

Q: If "Charles the body" (the Physical Charles) in any form; decay, bones, e.t.c. is found in the grave. And it is reported that "Charles the spirit" (the Spiritual Charles) is in another location, in heaven, what brought about such separation? Aren't the Watchtower unwittingly teaching the afterlife-like teaching that permits separation of spirit from body? (the same you accuse me of putting up)

For you to clarify anything further, you first have to consent that the above was not your argument or that it was your argument that you are now retracting. No muddling of things up will be entertained

If it was your argument and you still stand by it, we have to verify if that argument of yours is a bible based stance or it is an error as I think it is.

It is after this clarification that I will find your argument worthy of further attention or not.

There won't be need to banter further with you on this if your initial premise was in error, would it ?

Peace.

Same as above. Thanks.

Reiyvinn:


Now you are reading eisegesis into the text and in a way deviating from the point raised. I love the write-up tho, really nice, but it'd have been nicer if it did nail the point.

Firstly, Jesus didn't "SOME DEAD" but "THE DEAD" (in other words, whether it is "spiritual" or "physical" [which is debatable], Jesus, according to the Bible, said that they will COME OUT of their graves)

that is to say, if NO PART of man lives OUTSIDE the body, then for spiritual resurrection to be possible, the body has to be TRANSFORMED into a "spirit." and if that is the case, the bodies of men are not meant to be in their graves since their bodies have been TRANSFORMED into spirits...... Apart from that, having a body buried in a grave and a spirit belonging to that body in heavenwould mean that a part of man DOES live OUTSIDE the body.

My friend, I had told you I wish not go in circles, from the above, what you had posted in red remains for posterity.

Again, I dont know what you talked about "desolved", if you have evidence for your stance above on red, bring it up.

Stop posting verifiable comment and attempt to base on that to curry sympathy for error, rather, be man enough to own up to what you said above and I called you out on it.

I have shown you what the bible says about those going to heaven, if you had interest for the truth, you will be satisfied with the truth.

Build a knowledge of your own by reading the bible, and dont always wish that another persons lies and confusion should be your own confusion as well.

What that is contained on your quote above, is it what you belief that happens to the and those going to heaven or it is an error ?

My case is very simple.

I have shown you the correct info from the bible to set all this straigth.

Peace though.

^^^^

truthislight:


My friend, I had told you I wish not go in circles, from the above, what you had posted in red remains for posterity.

*sigh* I should have seen that coming.

Whether I should attribute that my poor analogy or your not being able to see that it was analogy and see through it to the point I actually making, I don't know.

Ok, let me put it straight:

What I meant, which I believe I was trying express here, was that [as I said in the previous comment] is->

* CT Russell, Rutherford and the other "anointed" that are dead are DEAD and BURIED, right?

* According to the Watchtower, these men were resurrected upon death to meet Jesus in Heaven starting from 1918, right?

* According to the Bible, when Jesus Christ was resurrected, the tomb was EMPTY; no body, no bones, no decay, e.t.c. Just his clothes.

* According to the Watchtower, Jesus received a "spiritual resurrection" AND these "anointed class," according to the Watchtower, will receive THE SAME spiritual resurrection, as did Jesus, to Heaven.

Q: if lets say CT Russell's grave is dug up, would it be just as Jesus' tomb was: EMPTY??

Again, I dont know what you talked about "desolved", if you have evidence for your stance above on red, bring it up.

*sigh again* I don't know you read comments. Was my "comment" which you highlighted in read a stance or an analogy.

What I was ACTUALLY pointing out was that the "spiritual Charles" cannot be in heaven while the dead "physical Charles" lies in the grave. Evidence: Jesus.

Stop posting verifiable comment and attempt to base on that to curry sympathy for error, rather, be man enough to own up to what you said above and I called you out on it.

I have shown you what the bible says about those going to heaven, if you had interest for the truth, you will be satisfied with the truth.

Both you and JMAN05 were actually debunking a point I never raised. You only assumed I was trying to prove that spirits leave bodies after death which I never raised rather than tackling the point raised.

Build a knowledge of your own by reading the bible, and dont always wish that another persons lies and confusion should be your own confusion as well.

What that is contained on your quote above, is it what you belief that happens to the and those going to heaven or it is an error ?

My case is very simple.

I have shown you the correct info from the bible to set all this straith.

Peace though.

Exactly what I'm saying. You aren't tackling the "Question For Jehovah's Witnesses" but "[Assumed] Personal Beliefs of the OP" which is not "setting things strai[ght]" but a straw man argument. Peace