u/AccomplishedAuthor3

There's a controversy floating around lately that questions whether the Word existed before "all things were made". Some are saying that John 1:3 refers only to the earth and all things that were made on this earth, but is that what John meant? No, it isn't. Paul explained to his fellow Jews that the Son [the Word] was the Creator of both Heaven and earth Hebrews 1:10 He [God] also says,

“In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands."

Back in Paul's day the heavens would have included all the heavenly bodies such as the sun, moon and the stars. The Bible was written by people and to people who saw the heavens as including the sun, moon and stars. That was the heavens that Christ's hands made. Science says the earth is billions of years old, so that would make Jesus at least that old, but the heavens are also the work of His hands and the visible heavens are quite a bit older than this earth. If we take into account the invisible heavens, then all bets are off. How long did Heaven, God's own home exist? I spell it like this---- E-T-E-R-N-I-T-Y

Does the Bible ever call the Word eternal? Yes. In 1 John 1:2 and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us The Word who became flesh was the eternal life long before ever becoming flesh. Long before the heavens existed. As far back as our finite minds will go, the Word "was"

So according to the Watchtower Society, if 6000 years of man's existence was up in 1872, who decided to change it to 1975 and why?

>SINCE a new Jewish lunar year began in September 1975 a significant point in human history was reached. What was that? According to the Bible’s count of time, mankind then completed 6,000 years of existence on earth. Yes, the first man Adam, if he had chosen to remain obedient under God’s rulership, would have still been alive and 6,000 years old in September of this year.w75 10/1 pp. 579-581

The Bible's count of time?? How can any organization that makes such big boo boos expect to be taken seriously on other matters, especially when they won't take any responsibility for any of their own errors?

In the grand scheme of things I guess 100 years is a blip on the scale, but for us who live inside that blip, its very meaningful. Being off by minutes can be devastating when launching a rocket into outer space. Imagine how one of Russell's original disciples would have reacted had they learned man's 6000 years wouldn't be up until 1975 and not 1872? To our generation I guess it wouldn't mean much, but that difference of 100 years treats two biblical generations as if they didn't matter at all. "Sorry guys, everything has been moved up 100 years. Uh, guess you're all going to die after all" Did the Bible or Jesus make a mistake and jump the gun? No, it was the Watchtower that jumped the gun and has continued to jump the gun for the last century. They started out lying and have continued to promise generation after generation that millions now living will never die. Speaking of Adam, that lie is as old as Adam

In fact it was Russell's own generation, those born around the year he was, 1852, that was originally considered to be "this generation" that would never die. They weren't looking forward to 1975. They were looking forward to 1914. That generation was old enough to have heard Abraham Lincoln give the Gettysburg Address in real time. Many, not much older than Russell, could have fought in the American Civil War. How many of that generation is still alive today? None. Not one. It was a lie. That generation is the forgotten generation. Forgotten on purpose by the Watchtower Society because time ran out for them 50 years ago when CT Russell and his generation would have been 123 years old, give or take a few years.

Russell couldn't even keep his own timeline straight within the same volume of Studies in Scripture, only pages later where on page 39 he subtracted a year from 1873 making it 1872.

>

1889 "Here we furnish the evidence that from the creation of Adam to (but not including) A.D. 1873 was six thousand years. (Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 2, p. 39. 1889)

Jehovah's witnesses claim this was when the church developed its doctrine on Hellfire, totally ignoring the fact that Christ preached more about Hell than He did of Heaven. Let's say the JW version was true. How does preaching Hell tickle anyone's ears? It sure didn't tickle Charles Russell's ears. He was on the verge of giving up on God and becoming an atheist because the God of the Bible didn't fit his idea of a just and loving God.

Teaching people about Hell isn't intended to be comforting. Its meant to be a disturbing warning to those that can still avoid Hell, not by chopping off a hand or gouging out an eye, but putting faith in Jesus Christ. JW's remove the warning sign when they remove the reality of Hell. If you tore down a sign warning of a washed out bridge, it wouldn't change the fact the bridge was washed out. It would only make people feel better for a little while...until they reached the bridge that was no longer there doing 65 mph

Had the early church wanted to tickle people's ears, preaching Hell fire was a Hell of a way to do it. Its actually teaching the myth that there is no eternal judgment that puts a person in danger. Believing death is just like taking a long nap may sound nice, but the reality will bite hard, not in this life, but after they die. Even though the idea of no Hell tickles the ears of those who find the idea of punishment repugnant, it is the worst possible thing to teach. Better to say "we don't know" than assure someone Hell isn't just like Jesus said it was.

Here's an unusual dilemma for JW's. Their view of death, Hell and eternal punishment matches that of atheists, not Jesus or the apostles. Teaching that there isn't anything after this life ends is teaching the myth of atheism to those who want to have their ears tickled

I can think of a few places the Watchtower nullifies the word of God with their 'traditions' Here are a couple I thought of.

Refusing blood transfusions to save human life. Jesus made an exception to the requirement that one should not work on the Sabbath in order to heal people. Luke 13:17 Jehovah's witnesses not only won't make any exceptions for themselves, but not even for their own children. They would sooner hold to their "tradition" of not accepting blood transfusions and sacrifice human life, something God doesn't desire than show mercy and save human life, something God actually desires Hosea 6:6

They will not celebrate Christmas because it violates their tradition. Not only that but they spend considerable time each year denigrating those who do celebrate the birth of the Prince of Peace. Angels actually prophesied that Jesus' birth would be a cause for "great" joy...for ALL people. But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people Because they see it as pagan, the celebration and cause of great joy for all people is preached by JW's as gloomy news and not a cause of great joy for anyone The Watchtower tradition of panning Christmas nullifies the joyous prophesy of God's own angels

JW's won't serve in the military or as policemen. Again, because of their 'tradition' they nullify the work of God's servants in Romans chapter 13. They don't see aspiring to serve others as being worthy of their time. Jesus said no greater love than someone that lays down their life for a friend. John 15:13 Policemen and soldiers do this as part of their job. Many have died trying to save others and in many cases have succeeded in saving not only their own life but the life of a potential victim. JW's nullify the word of God by never even offering to lay down their life or even putting it at risk by serving those they claim to 'love'. They feel saving life in this world is a waste of time. But if a person won't show mercy to themselves how can they show mercy to anyone else?

When a person dies by trying to save another person's life, one life, or perhaps both lives may be saved, but how many lives are saved if someone dies because they refused treatment? They aren't laying down their lives for a friend when they die because they refused a blood transfusion. They nullify God's mercy and the sanctity of life which is in the blood... which is in the person. Its the person who should be sacred , not just their blood. Blood is only sacred if its inside a person, not spilled on the ground