Why do Jehovah's Witnesses continue to preach door to door and in other ways? And what do you think of them?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA, yea thats why John 1:1 - IN THE ORIGINAL GREEK says that the word IS GOD... dumbass...

From what I see they do witness on the internet like OP and DGN. They also do letter writing and calling people on telephones. Let's see, they also do what they call informal witnessing where they speak to people when they are out and about. There is also street witnessing in cities. Going door to door is only a part of their preaching work.

I love debating JW's.
When the first two arrive, they can't answer my bible questions.
Then when they go get a higher JW after several times at my house unable to answer my bible questions.
Then I get a elder who I get to talk to directly and I start speaking Hebrew to them and open up on them, I love the perplexity of their faces.

When I ask them for an example, How come you think you are the only chosen of God, when in the book of Rev. chapter 2 and 3 Christ found no fault with two of those 7 churches mentioned in those two chapters.
Duh? I get.. lol

Then I open up on them what the Word says and I love to watch their faces again.
Sorry, if you be JW, don't get upset with me.
Just telling it like it is.. or was what ever the way you want to look at it.

My brother had them at his house about a month ago. They were there every Wed. for two months.
My brother invited me to one of their chats, because my brother did not know the Word as well as I do.
They did not like me much because when they presented their paper work they brought with them from the last meeting with my brother. I proved them wrong. They did not like that and the oldest elder got upset and started yelling.
When she relaxed from her emotional explosion I said, only Jesus sets the path to the Kingdom of God.
Arch angel Michael has no say so in that path.

so, Einstein, if the doctor told you not to "EAT" or "Drink" alchohol, would you "transfuse" it relyng on the technicality of the word "eat"? Stay with your midevil religions that refuse to change ANYTHING, no matter how they conflict with the Bible.

i was sexually molested by a ministeriel servant in Tx congregation

JWs can fuck off

My definition of a cult is someone or some church that wants to do your thinking for you.
Quite clear.

They give me a great reason to wear my birthday suit to the front door.

JW's don't have female "Elders"- nice try....

that they have to count each month. If you get a few hours,I have heard talks that called that token service.

The scripture in the Bible says to abstain or stay away from blood. That would be not using it in anyway especially internally. And I don't think they were transfusing in bible times but people were eating it. Blood is just not safe.

[link to bible.cc]

If you EAT blood you digest it. If you transfuse it, it is an organ. For fucks sake are you that stupid? The text in Acts has to do with the gladitorial events and the drinking of blood to take on the spirit of your dead opponent. Learn history TARD...

What foods do you eat?

did the ministerial servant deny this?

They call it pioneering. Unfortunately, they are breaking the JW code from their HQ that forbids them to come on websites like this. Hypocrites....

Then why does Jesus call him Father? Or refer to himself as the son in every other verse.

STAY OFF THE INTERNET!! REPORT THOSE WHO LOOK AT APOSTATE MATERIAL!

I remember these talks.

You rely, as do other Trinitarians on one verse? Read the whole book of John, it is clear that God is greater than the Christ. Further who was sacrificed on behalf of mankind? Was that person just part of a triune God? That would make Jesus sacrifice null, and a lie- exactly what Satan wants to promote. The Trinity- a belief that originated with ancient Babylon- a place that was the center of false religion in the Bible.

yes


his family were all elders

2 of em
his father and uncle

they would say..the internet would be like eating off the table of demons.

And yet..Jesus ate with sinners.

That code doesn't exist. Grasping at straws, and spreading lies, coward

Sorry, you mis-understood dummy.
I said there was a woman there at first and went and got and elder, NICE TRY yourself. Re-read my words again, false accuser.

Last Edited by Little Star on 03/28/2013 12:31 PM

I think they believe they are following God's command. I believe they need to read the bible other than the one they use which has altered some very fundamental truths. I believe they are mislead and will then mislead.

same here. They always deny. my molester wen't on to raping two other little girls for years. Finally he got his ass handed to him,because all the victims got together.

No, the word was WITH God. God cannot be with Himself. Another of His Creations can be. And there is no mention of the holy spirit here. There is no trinity spoken of here at all. Just two. Also, the scripture says "in the beginning". There is no beginning for God. He has always been here and always will be here. But there was a beginning for Jesus.

Also, Jesus is never called Almighty God. Only Mighty God.

Isaiah 9:6
For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

It is simple. Jesus is God's son who died for us. God did not die nor will he ever.

Eat it!!!!!!!

The Council at Jerusalem
In order to understand how the Jehovah's Witnesses arrive at their conclusion regarding the acceptance or refusal of blood transfusions it is important understand the core biblical texts first. Those particular texts are Acts 15:20 and 29. "ut that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood" (v. 20). "[T]hat you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell" (v. 29) [NASB].

The whole context encompassing verses 20 and 29 involves a challenge which began in Antioch, just after Paul and Barnabas had finished their first missionary tour of duty. Upon arriving at Antioch, which was the base of operations for Paul and Barnabas, they are confronted by some representatives of the heresy of the Pharisees.5 The heretic's contention is found in both verses 1 and 5, and which state that "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved" (v. 1) and "It is necessary to circumcise them [Gentiles], and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses" (v. 5). In other words, some legalistic Jews who had become a part of the church ("the sect of the Pharisees who had believed") were insisting that all Gentile converts be circumcised according to the Law, otherwise those converts could not be genuinely saved. This raised the ire of both Paul and Barnabas (v. 2), which resulted in the gathering at Jerusalem of "the church and the apostles and the elders" (v. 4) to settle the issue.

There is no record of how long the proceedings took, nor of all those who contributed to the debate. What we do know is that there were many questions (pollh/j de. zhth,sewj genome,nhj), which probably took a fair amount of time to work through, coupled with testimony from Paul, Barnabas, and Simeon (vv. 12, 14), and then at least two declarations on the matter from Peter and James, the latter of which was the pastor of the church at Jerusalem. Peter's argument was that God had redeemed the Gentiles on the same basis of faith as that of the Jews. Therefore, he asks the heretical Pharisees, "Now therefore, why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?" James concludes the council by issuing the final edict: "Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, but that we write to them that they abstain from thing contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood" (vv. 19-20). The church agreed with James' proclamation and then sat down to write a letter to the Gentiles in Antioch expressing the sentiments of what was determined. The concluding statement found in verse 29 repeats what has since been taken out of context by the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society to mean that a blood transfusion should be rejected. Yet, all the conclusion entailed was that all people, if they are to be saved, are saved by grace, through faith, and that all legalisms contribute nothing to a person's salvation. That for either conscience, moral, or sanitary sakes, the Gentiles should refrain from participating in those things that would preclude them from "doing well" in terms of walking the Christian life.6


[link to capro.info]

[link to www.jwfacts.com]


[link to www.apologeticspress.org]


...but you will accept blood fractions? So if god tells you NOT to eat cake, it is acceptable to bypass the law and eat eggs, sugar, flour, etc. seperately? Yea...



JW tard...

true

The truth of the matter.
Read John 1:1, 1 Eph. John 1:1 and read REv. 2:17 and tell us all what the new name is that Christ will have when he comes?
The answer is in the book.

Matthew 23:13 "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.

If the bible says abstain it means to not use it in any way.

Annoying people. I always wanted to find where they live and knock on there door and start preaching what I believe to them.