# *Response to AF: Part One

[ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Cygnus [Cygnus] on November 02, 1999 at 13:04:24 {.c1iAaocfMrol7LMpW5IL4bdfUTIaI}:

In Reply to: Response to AF: Part One posted by Greg Staffor on November 02, 1999 at 11:47:33:

I've just a couple of comments.

: There is no group of persons on earth today that bear such a striking resemblance to early Christianity than Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Which version of early Christianity, I wonder, is Greg talking about. JWs often compare their organization with "first century Christianity," but who, and when? 33C.E.? 51C.E.? 98C.E.? If there exists any similarities, it is due to the fact that just as Christianity changed often and had a lot of internal problems with false prophesying and trouble makers, so have JWs. Big deal.

: Can you give me the name of one other international group of professing Christians whose Gospel theme is God’s kingdom,

All of them.

Now, the definition of God's Kingdom might differ among groups. Certainly, the JW version is unbiblical -- that of the Kingdom's "birth" in 1914.

The Church of God: General Conference and the Christadelphians are two such "international" Christian groups whose main focus is on the Kingdom as a real government (those links will demonstrate that). I also hear of very many Protestant groups as well as evangelical Catholic groups that believe in God's kingdom as a future world government.

: who make more than a token use of God’s name (a group who TRULY makes it “known”),

Except first century Christians did not use the Divine Name. Even Jesus didn't.

: who are politically neutral,

There is nothing in the Bible that demands the political neutrality JWs practice.

: who are unified in their message,

Too vague to answer. Do you mean in the essentials, or in every last detail?

: who refuse to be identified as part of the “world,”

Lots and lots of Christians do this. Of course, it depends on one's definition of "the world."

Certainly JWs in later decades have strived to be identified as a legitimate religion, entitled to the same status other "worldly" religions have, and JWs make every use of the legal and economic system to further their organization, which makes them part of the world (in the first century, sometimes the apostle Paul and others had to resort to legal means as well, but other times God miraculously came to the rescue -- that doesn't happen to JWs). JWs are even instructed in child custody cases to make it sound like they are no different from 'the world.'

: who interpret the Bible apart from THE post-biblical creeds,

See my links above. Those are just two groups that I am familiar with. Now that I think about it, I'm sure the Mormons fit many of these categories as well.

: who are not divided by racial prejudices,

Can you name any international Christian communities that are? There aren't many.

: and who take Jesus’ command to “go . . . and make disciples of people of all the nations” as seriously as do Jehovah’s Witnesses?

As seriously. Hmmm. Well, I personally don't think JWs take their evangelising that seriously, on a personal level. I think headquarters tries hard to cover as much of the planet as possible, but you can't tell me that two JWs strolling along the sidewalk at .5mph waiting for 10:45 to roll around so they can hit the local Tim Horton's is taking Jesus' words seriously.

: if we were to accept your misuse of this WT then we would have to say that the WT is teaching that even members of the “great crowd” cannot be Christians!

Which is true. Members of the great crowd cannot share in the biblical Christian hope, ergo, they aren't true, scriptural Christians. They are pseudochristians.

Follow Ups:

- **Response to AF: Part One Rational crctd 15:59:30 11/02/99 (11)
  - ***Response to AF: Part One Cygnus 23:59:38 11/02/99 (0)
  - ***Response to AF: Part One Al; 18:54:48 11/02/99 (0)
  - ***Response to AF: Part One Friend 17:16:29 11/02/99 (6)
    - ****Response to AF: Part One Rational 18:13:21 11/02/99 (5)
      - *****Response to AF: Part One Friend 18:34:29 11/02/99 (4)
        - ******Response to AF: Part One Rational 06:14:13 11/03/99 (3)
          - *******Response to AF: Part One Friend 07:18:21 11/03/99 (2)
            - ********Response to AF: Part One Rational 09:13:06 11/03/99 (1)
              - *********Response to AF: Part One Friend 09:46:43 11/03/99 (0)
  - ***Response to AF: Part One Farkel 16:27:31 11/02/99 (1)
    - ****Response to AF: Part One Rational 17:24:48 11/02/99 (0)
- **Response to AF: Part One Rational 15:56:34 11/02/99 (0)
- **Response to AF: Part One proplog2 15:18:08 11/02/99 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject: **Response to AF: Part One

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ FAQ ]