The JW's should be the YW's

Originally posted by divegeester
Oh come off it Galveston75. Your whole JW organisation is built on a foundation of error; as soon as you guys stop kidding yourselves that you have the whole infallible truth and are the special ones of god, the sooner you will be taken more seriously as being sincere seekers, which is the same as the rest of the theistic world. You claim to be the ch ...[text shortened]... Do JWs believe this today?

Do you personally believe this?

Waits at bar with LONG drink...

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Thank you. That shows you are a nice guy🙂

Originally posted by divegeester
Oh come off it Galveston75. Your whole JW organisation is built on a foundation of error; as soon as you guys stop kidding yourselves that you have the whole infallible truth and are the special ones of god, the sooner you will be taken more seriously as being sincere seekers, which is the same as the rest of the theistic world. You claim to be the ch ...[text shortened]... Do JWs believe this today?

Do you personally believe this?

Waits at bar with LONG drink...

From the Reasoning book part 1: Jehovah’s Witnesses do not claim to be inspired prophets. They have made mistakes. Like the apostles of Jesus Christ, they have at times had some wrong expectations.—Luke 19:11; Acts 1:6.

The Scriptures provide time elements related to Christ’s presence, and Jehovah’s Witnesses have studied these with keen interest. (Luke 21:24; Dan. 4:10-17) Jesus also described a many-featured sign that would tie in with the fulfillment of time prophecies to identify the generation that would live to see the end of Satan’s wicked system of things. (Luke 21:7-36) Jehovah’s Witnesses have pointed to evidence in fulfillment of this sign. It is true that the Witnesses have made mistakes in their understanding of what would occur at the end of certain time periods, but they have not made the mistake of losing faith or ceasing to be watchful as to fulfillment of Jehovah’s purposes. They have continued to keep to the fore in their thinking the counsel given by Jesus: “Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming.”—Matt. 24:42.

Originally posted by galveston75
From the Reasoning book part 1: Jehovah’s Witnesses do not claim to be inspired prophets. They have made mistakes. Like the apostles of Jesus Christ, they have at times had some wrong expectations.—Luke 19:11; Acts 1:6.

The Scriptures provide time elements related to Christ’s presence, and Jehovah’s Witnesses have studied these with keen interest. (L ...[text shortened]... on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming.”—Matt. 24:42.

Originally posted by galveston75
I've answered your question about 3 times now.

So moving on, lets think outside of the box here for a minute and let me ask you and the others here that are determined to point out our flaws a couple questions.
Did any of the people or groups or nations that God delt with in the past such as the Isrealites, Jews, etc, that we all acknowledge were ...[text shortened]... So keep pointing your fingers at the JW's for mistakes but that proves nothing does it?

Originally posted by galveston75
I've answered your question about 3 times now.

So moving on, lets think outside of the box here for a minute and let me ask you and the others here that are determined to point out our flaws a couple questions.
Did any of the people or groups or nations that God delt with in the past such as the Isrealites, Jews, etc, that we all acknowledge were ...[text shortened]... So keep pointing your fingers at the JW's for mistakes but that proves nothing does it?

Originally posted by galveston75
From the Reasoning book part 1: Jehovah’s Witnesses do not claim to be inspired prophets. They have made mistakes. Like the apostles of Jesus Christ, they have at times had some wrong expectations....

Originally posted by galveston75
Part 2: Matters on which corrections of viewpoint have been needed have been relatively minor when compared with the vital Bible truths that they have discerned ... ...The human soul is not immortal, as the ancient pagans claimed; it dies, and the hope for future life is in the resurrection.

Originally posted by duecer
I was reading through your posts and tripped over this little gem (in quote box). The watchtower society claims that the soul dies, when exactly does that happen? does it happen in the passing of the mortal shell, or does it die at the judgment seat? The watchtower society claims that when the body expires,( the body itself being the soul), the soul expires. ...[text shortened]... ets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "

Originally posted by Rajk999
This passage from Christ also contradicts that teaching that the body and soul are one and the same ;

Matt 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Man can kill the body but not the soul. Only God can kill both body and soul.
Clearly body and soul are separate and distinguishable parts of a being.

SOUL PART 1:
The original-language terms (Heb., nephesh Gr., psykhe as used in the Scriptures show “soul” to be a person, an animal, or the life that a person or an animal enjoys.
The connotations that the English “soul” commonly carries in the minds of most persons are not in agreement with the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words as used by the inspired Bible writers. This fact has steadily gained wider acknowledgment. Back in 1897, in the Journal of Biblical Literature (Vol. XVI, p. 30), Professor C. A. Briggs, as a result of detailed analysis of the use of nephesh, observed: “Soul in English usage at the present time conveys usually a very different meaning from[nephesh] in Hebrew, and it is easy for the incautious reader to misinterpret.”
More recently, when The Jewish Publication Society of America issued a new translation of the Torah, or first five books of the Bible, the editor-in-chief, H. M. Orlinsky of Hebrew Union College, stated that the word “soul” had been virtually eliminated from this translation because, “the Hebrew word in question here is ‘Nefesh.’” He added: “Other translators have interpreted it to mean ‘soul,’ which is completely inaccurate. The Bible does not say we have a soul. ‘Nefesh’ is the person himself, his need for food, the very blood in his veins, his being.”—The New York Times, October 12, 1962.

SOUL PART 2:

What is the origin of the teaching that the human soul is invisible and immortal?
The difficulty lies in the fact that the meanings popularly attached to the English word “soul” stem primarily, not from the Hebrew or Christian Greek Scriptures, but from ancient Greek philosophy, actually pagan religious thought. Greek philosopher Plato, for example, quotes Socrates as saying: “The soul, . . . if it departs pure, dragging with it nothing of the body, . . . goes away into that which is like itself, into the invisible, divine, immortal, and wise, and when it arrives there it is happy, freed from error and folly and fear . . . and all the other human ills, and . . . lives in truth through all after time with the gods.”—Phaedo, 80, D, E; 81, A.
In direct contrast with the Greek teaching of the psykhe (soul) as being immaterial, intangible, invisible, and immortal, the Scriptures show that both psykhe and nephesh, as used with reference to earthly creatures, refer to that which is material, tangible, visible, and mortal.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia says: “Nepes [nephesh] is a term of far greater extension than our ‘soul,’ signifying life (Ex 21.23; Dt 19.21) and its various vital manifestations: breathing (Gn 35.18; Jb 41.13[21]), blood [Gn 9.4; Dt 12.23; Ps 140(141).8], desire (2 Sm 3.21; Prv 23.2). The soul in the O[ld] T[estament] means not a part of man, but the whole man—man as a living being. Similarly, in the N[ew] T[estament] it signifies human life: the life of an individual, conscious subject (Mt 2.20; 6.25; Lk 12.22-23; 14.26; Jn 10.11, 15, 17; 13.37).”—1967, Vol. XIII, p. 467.
The Roman Catholic translation, The New American Bible, in its “Glossary of Biblical Theology Terms” (pp. 27, 28), says: “In the New Testament, to ‘save one’s soul’ (Mk 8:35) does not mean to save some ‘spiritual’ part of man, as opposed to his ‘body’ (in the Platonic sense) but the whole person with emphasis on the fact that the person is living, desiring, loving and willing, etc., in addition to being concrete and physical.”—Edition published by P. J. Kenedy & Sons, New York, 1970.
Ne′phesh evidently comes from a root meaning “breathe” and in a literal sense nephesh could be rendered as “a breather.” Koehler and Baumgartner’s Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros (Leiden, 1958, p. 627) defines it as: “the breathing substance, making man a[nd] animal living beings Gn 1, 20, the soul (strictly distinct from the greek notion of soul) the seat of which is the blood Gn 9, 4f Lv 17, 11 Dt 12, 23: (249 X) . . . soul = living being, individual, person.”
As for the Greek word psykhe Greek-English lexicons give such definitions as “life,” and “the conscious self or personality as centre of emotions, desires, and affections,” “a living being,” and they show that even in non-Biblical Greek works the term was used “of animals.” Of course, such sources, treating as they do primarily of classical Greek writings, include all the meanings that the pagan Greek philosophers gave to the word, including that of “departed spirit,” “the immaterial and immortal soul,” “the spirit of the universe,” and “the immaterial principle of movement and life.” Evidently because some of the pagan philosophers taught that the soul emerged from the body at death, the term psykhe; was also applied to the “butterfly or moth,” which creatures go through a metamorphosis, changing from caterpillar to winged creature.—Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, revised by H. Jones, 1968, pp. 2026, 2027; Donnegan’s New Greek and English Lexicon, 1836, p. 1404.
The ancient Greek writers applied psykhe; in various ways and were not consistent, their personal and religious philosophies influencing their use of the term. Of Plato, to whose philosophy the common ideas about the English “soul” may be attributed (as is generally acknowledged), it is stated: “While he sometimes speaks of one of [the alleged] three parts of the soul, the ‘intelligible,’ as necessarily immortal, while the other two parts are mortal, he also speaks as if there were two souls in one body, one immortal and divine, the other mortal.”—The Evangelical Quarterly, London, 1931, Vol. III, p. 121, “Thoughts on the Tripartite Theory of Human Nature,” by A. McCaig.
In view of such inconsistency in non-Biblical writings, it is essential to let the Scriptures speak for themselves, showing what the inspired writers meant by their use of the term psykhe, as well as by nephesh. Nephesh occurs 754 times in the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Scriptures, while psykhe appears by itself 102 times in the Westcott and Hort text of the Christian Greek Scriptures, giving a total of 856 occurrences. (See NW appendix, p. 1573.) This frequency of occurrence makes possible a clear concept of the sense that these terms conveyed to the minds of the inspired Bible writers and the sense their writings should convey to our mind. An examination shows that, while the sense of these terms is broad, with different shades of meaning, among the Bible writers there was no inconsistency, confusion, or disharmony as to man’s nature, as existed among the Grecian philosophers of the so-called Classical Period.

SOUL PART 3:

Earth’s First Souls. The initial occurrences of nephesh are found at Genesis 1:20-23. On the fifth creative “day” God said: “‘Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls [nephesh] and let flying creatures fly over the earth . . . ’ And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul [nephesh] that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind.” Similarly on the sixth creative “day” nephesh is applied to the “domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth” as “living souls.”—Ge 1:24.
After man’s creation, God’s instruction to him again used the term nephesh with regard to the animal creation, “everything moving upon the earth in which there is life as a soul [literally, in which there is living soul (nephesh)].” (Ge 1:30) Other examples of animals being so designated are found at Genesis 2:19; 9:10-16; Leviticus 11:10, 46; 24:18; Numbers 31:28; Ezekiel 47:9. Notably, the Christian Greek Scriptures coincide in applying the Greek psy to animals, as at Revelation 8:9; 16:3, where it is used of creatures in the sea.
Thus, the Scriptures clearly show that nephesh and psykhe are used to designate the animal creation lower than man. The same terms apply to man.
The Human Soul. Precisely the same Hebrew phrase used of the animal creation, namely, nephesh chaiyah (living soul), is applied to Adam, when, after God formed man out of dust from the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, “the man came to be a living soul.” (Ge 2:7) Man was distinct from the animal creation, but that distinction was not because he was a nephesh (soul) and they were not. Rather, the record shows that it was because man alone was created “in God’s image.” (Ge 1:26, 27) He was created with moral qualities like those of God, with power and wisdom far superior to the animals; hence he could have in subjection all the lower forms of creature life. (Ge 1:26, 28) Man’s organism was more complex, as well as more versatile, than that of the animals. (Compare 1Co 15:39.) Likewise, Adam had, but lost, the prospect of eternal life; this is never stated with regard to the creatures lower than man.—Ge 2:15-17; 3:22-24.
It is true that the account says that ‘God proceeded to blow into the man’s nostrils the breath [form of neshamah of life,’ whereas this is not stated in the account of the animal creation. Clearly, however, the account of the creation of man is much more detailed than that of the creation of animals. Moreover, Genesis 7:21-23, in describing the Flood’s destruction of “all flesh” outside the ark, lists the animal creatures along with mankind and says: “Everything in which the breath [form of neshamah of the force of life was active in its nostrils, namely, all that were on the dry ground, died.” Obviously, the breath of life of the animal creatures also originally came from the Creator, Jehovah God.
So, too, the “spirit” (Heb., ruach; Gr., pneuma), or life-force, of man is not distinct from the life-force in animals, as is shown by Ecclesiastes 3:19-21, which states that “they all have but one spirit [uruach].”

Originally posted by galveston75
SOUL PART 2:

What is the origin of the teaching that the human soul is invisible and immortal?
The difficulty lies in the fact that the meanings popularly attached to the English word “soul” stem primarily, not from the Hebrew or Christian Greek Scriptures, but from ancient Greek philosophy, actually pagan religious thought. Greek philosopher Plato ...[text shortened]... as to man’s nature, as existed among the Grecian philosophers of the so-called Classical Period.