Bridge of Reason

  Last time I began to respond to an article on JW.org entitled: ‘Protect Yourself from Misinformation’. I suggested that, though the advice given was generally sound, they need to take the counsel and apply it to Jehovah's organisation. The article continues by encouraging Jehovah's people to ‘evaluate the reliability of the source' saying that: News media companies and other organizations may slant a story because of their commercial or political bias. This really is an article that just keeps on giving. This could just have easily said: ‘The Watchtower organization may slant a story because of their commercial and theological bias.’ Let’s Agree Now, I do find myself agreeing with some of the advice given in the article. For example, they say: 'Compare what you see in one news outlet with other sources'. I agree. Yes, we should. 'At times, friends may inadvertently pass on misinformation through email messages or social media posts. Therefore, do not trust a

  In the Reasoning book, p.410 Jehovah's Witnesses cite several texts they say ‘proves’ Jesus is not God: 'The Father is greater than I' John 14:28 'The head of Christ is God' 1 Cor.11:3 '...then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one.' 1 Cor.15:27,28 Is Jesus, after all, not God but a creature? Is the Father alone God, and Jesus a created heavenly being sent to carry out God's will? The Father is Greater - John 14:28 As we consider Jesus’ words in John 14:28 we must take into account, in the same chapter, the gospels clear witness to the full deity of Jesus and his equality with the Father: ‘ Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.’ (v9) ‘ Believe me that I am n the Father and the Father is in me.’ (v11) And earlier: 'I and the Father are One' - (10:30) All three members of the Trinity are fully God, equal in substance, separate in person. In th

I am not a massive cricket fan, but I do enjoy the odd test match and, of course, the Ashes. I find the battle the battle between the batsman and the bowler fascinating. The bowler seeks to tempt the batsman into playing a shot that will lead to his dismissal, but every now and then the bowler will not quite get it right, giving the batsman the opportunity to hit the ball for six. Now lest you fear the Reachout Trust blog has decided to ditch cults and start commenting on sport, let me share with you where I am going with this. Every now and then a cultic group, like the bowler in the cricket match, will give the batsman (in this case Reachout Trust) the opportunity to hit the ball for six. This is what the Jehovah’s Witnesses have done in their feature article on JW.org. The piece is entitled: ‘Protect Yourself from Misinformation’ and, as I began to read it, I nearly spat out my coffee. If only Jehovah’s Witnesses would take what they are here being taught and apply it to their own

  How is a person made righteous before a Holy God? This was the big question at the time of the Reformation, and it continues to be the most important issue today. Let us consider how the Jehovah’s Witnesses might answer, as I continue to review the Convention address by Brother David Schafer. This is what Jehovah says, your Repurchaser, the Holy One of Israel: “I, Jehovah, am your God, The One teaching you to benefit yourself, The One guiding you in the way you should walk. If only you would pay attention to my commandments! Then your peace would become just like a river and your righteousness like the waves of the sea. Isaiah 48:17-18 NWT Brother Schafer said that these verses from Isaiah teach us that imperfect human beings can have a righteous standing before God. He claimed that the peace that righteousness brings is achieved by obedience to Jehovah’s commandments. What he fails to mention is that these verses were given to the people of Israel and should be, at least in the way

It is always good to know old friends are still on form and issuing thoughtful challenges to the ministry of Reachout Trust. One such is a good man who is a faithful Mormon and has been for many years. The challenge was to our use of the word ‘Mormon’ when we know ‘the name is the CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day saints.’ The question is, which church name would he have us use given the name has changed so much over the years. Instead of Mormonism should we call it, ‘The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints-ism?’ I would point out the current Mormon prophet, M Russell Nelson, has point-blank contradicted the policy of his immediate predecessor, Thomas S Monson. Perhaps Mormons should look closer to home and have the Mormon Church do some housekeeping. The various names of the church have been: The Church of Christ - 1830 The Church of the Latter Day Saints - 1834 The Church of Jesus Christ - Joseph Smith, History of the Church, 3:24, footnote The Church of God - ibid

  As I continue to review the Jehovah’s Witness ‘Pursue Peace’ Convention, here we have Brother David Schafer who is described as a helper to the Teaching Committee. As I begin, it may be helpful to mention that this week I spoke to some Witnesses at their cart, and the ladies had clearly been listening to this talk, as they almost quoted verbatim some of the things here mentioned. Brother Schafer begins with a common Watchtower trick. He takes a verse completely out of its context, so that it will appear to support what he wants to teach. The verse in question was Isaiah 32 verse 17 in the New World Translation: The result of true righteousness will be peace, And the fruitage of true righteousness will be lasting tranquility and security. Firstly, let us consider the context of this verse. From chapter twenty-eight through to thirty-nine of Isaiah, we read that Jerusalem has been delivered with numerous warnings. The people are told that they shouldn’t be trusting foreign nations to h

  Continuing our look at the Trinity, we find in the Reasoning book p. 210 the Watch Tower continues to address the question: 'Does the Bible teach that none of those who are said to be included in the Trinity is greater or less than another, that all are equal, that all are almighty?' They comment on the gospel text in Matt. 20:20-23, RS: “ The mother of the sons of Zebedee . . . said to him [Jesus], ‘Command that these two sons of mine may sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom.’ But Jesus answered, . . . ‘You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.’” They go on: ‘ (How strange, if, as claimed, Jesus is God! Was Jesus here merely answering according to his “human nature”? If, as Trinitarians say, Jesus was truly “God-man”—both God and man, not one or the other—would it truly be consistent to resort to such an explanation? Does not Matthew 20: