u/AccomplishedAuthor3

Here again the word "worship" is thrown around by the Watchtower and used to describe the pope as "worshipping" the beast in 1965. Did the pope really worship the UN, who the Watchtower still teaches is the 666 Beast of Revelation 13? No, but they infer the pope worshipped the UN because he gave a speech before that body, praising and honoring their work. In that case, anyone admiring or directing honor to that political organization is in effect worshipping that organization. Really? Gosh, that could apply to any organization including the Watchtower.😎 That could even apply to honoring the Roman emperor which Peter advised Christians to do Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor. 1 Peter 2:17 Is It Religion’s Duty to Enter the Political Field? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

The irony is in how the Watchtower reduces the power in the word worship as it applies to Jesus Christ and renders it as "do obeisance" However, Satan, the beast and even pagan gods are all allowed to be "worshipped" in the Watchtower's nwt. Everyone but Jesus is allowed to be worshipped in the nwt. Except for the very first edition of the nwt, where Jesus is actually worshipped in Hebrews 1:6, they changed that in later editions to "do obeisance". Why? If one can take the same Greek word and make it mean worship in one case and do obeisance in another, what's the point in that, except to demote the one who had been worshipped to being worthy of "obeisance" which the Watchtower considers to be less than worship

The Watchtower once taught that celebrating birthdays, Christmas, Easter, voting in elections and accepting blood transfusions were paramount to worshipping the 666 Beast. I don't know if they still do, but for a long time they did. They claim people have been worshipping the Beast from 1919, as the League of Nations, until 1945 when the UN became the Beast who was... The same standard they use for defining worship of the UN isn't used for Christ and that's a huge problem for them. If they applied the same standard as they do for worship of the UN then the following verses would prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Christ is to be worshipped ...above all.

Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, saying:

“To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb
be praise and honor and glory and power,
for ever and ever!”

The four living creatures said, “Amen,” and the elders fell down and worshiped. Revelation 5:13-14 Look at where the Lamb is, now look at where the UN, Satan and all pagan gods are...and tell me who is really worthy of worship Christians should honor the UN, or a President, or a Prime Minister, but real Christians never confuse men on this earth with Christ in Heaven, not like Jehovah's witnesses have

This verse gets twisted and misinterpreted by the Watchtower and Jehovah's witnesses as they teach we aren't supposed to pray to Jesus. They acknowledge praying 'in Jesus name' at end of each prayer as if Jesus name was a post script.. That might be Ok, as many Christians end their prayer that way, but JW's never even talk to Jesus, the One who died for them. They don't even try. Uh, I'm afraid that just won't end well. We need to approach the Son in prayer, not just His name tacked on to the end of a prayer. Jesus Christ is more than just a name tacked on to the end of a prayer. He's our Savior, our Lord, our life. Colossians 3:4 But Jehovah's witnesses don't ever bother to talk to Him. I ask you, how can you ever hope to get to know the Son if you won't ever talk to Him? Prayer is a supernatural form of communication with the Divine Nature. It cannot be interrupted, disconnected or turned off, but it requires we use it. If we don't want to speak with Jesus now, when will we?

Jesus is a real Person. He's alive! The Son of God knows the Father who we can't approach unless we approach the Son first. He reveals the Father and acts as an intermediary. John 1:18 Literally every prayer we ask even "our Father who is in Heaven" prayer, must go thru Jesus the Person, not just thru His name.

Stephen was moments away from death and had seen a vision of Christ standing at His Father's right side. Stephen cried out to Jesus in his last words spoken on this earth to receive his spirit and then asked Jesus not to hold his murderer's sins against them. Acts 7:59-60 The only name used by Stephen was the Lord Jesus. Stephen knew Jesus as his Lord and the Father would hear his prayer, because he did know Jesus and spoke to Him in prayer. Stephen was assured Jesus promised He would do whatever he ask Him in His name and he asked that He receive his spirit. Its the only way to pray and know for sure the Father hears us. We go thru a man, not just a name to get to the Father. We go to Jesus and thru Jesus and he hooks us up with the Father. Stephen was with both God the Father and His Son the minute the rocks pummeled his body

Jesus is right here on this earth, in the Spirit. He hears our prayers, but when we pray to someone else even if we assume that someone is the Father, it might not be the Father we assume it is. There is another father out there who would love to intercept our prayers as if we were praying to him. He's the father of the Pharisees, according to Jesus . Praying to Jesus Christ and thru Jesus Christ guarantees our prayers will be heard by His Father in Heaven. Before one goes thru someone, they must first approach that someone. Jesus said "I am the gate". So now, we approach the gate when we wish to speak with our Father. Jesus, not the Watchtower, is that gate, not any religious figure, or figures who claim to be Christ, or be what Christ alone is---the Truth John 14:6

Jesus said one particular group of people will come to Him on judgment day boasting of all their good works that they did and they will even remind Jesus that they did them all in... His Name. So what happens? The very last thing they expected. He tells them "I never knew you" Matthew 7:21-23 What? How can that be when they did all those wonderful deeds "in Jesus name"? Could it be Jesus won't know them because they never tried to know Him? They never even acknowledged Jesus existed in their prayers, except to mention Jesus 'name' at the end of their prayer. How can Jesus know them, or anyone else, if they never even speak to Him? Let me tell you, you must communicate with the guy who said I Am the Way, or you could lose your way.

Jehovah's witnesses translate the same two verses in their New World Translation like this " ...Then, kneeling down, he cried out with a strong voice: “Jehovah, do not charge this sin against them.” And after saying this, he fell asleep in death." With no regard for the original Greek or the fact that "Jehovah", "Yahweh", or YHWH ever appears in the NT at all, they arbitrarily swap the title Lord with the name Jehovah, forcing that name into Stephen's mouth. With the way they add names and words where they aren't ever warranted, the Watchtower Bible needs to be renamed "New Word Translation" It really is that

Not only is Stephen NOT quoting from the OT in Acts 7:59-60, but in their incessant need to insert the name Jehovah wherever and wherever they can, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society actually mixed up who receives spirits and who judges men's sins. God the Father clearly receives spirits Ecclesiastes 12:7, Luke 23:46 while Jesus is the judge of men's sins. Jesus said "The Father judges no one." John 5:22 How can they be so blind as to miss this? It tells me they were so hot to put Jehovah in the NT they made a mess they cannot hope to explain.

If you are a JW I really would like to know how you explain the way the Watchtower translates and teaches these verses? How do you justify swapping the name Jehovah for "Lord" unless Lord actually and ultimately means Jehovah? In which case, guess what? When you say "Jesus is Lord" you are actually saying Jesus is Jehovah. Romans 10:9 There is only ONE Lord according to Paul 1 Corinthians 8:6 Would anyone be so bold as to say Jehovah is not that ONE Lord?

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