Questions for ''Jehovah's Witnesses''

Questions for ''Jehovah's Witnesses'' By John Christian (amateur translate from Greek). This booklet is written in an inverse way that Watchtower magazines issue-that is, while the first perspective makes preaching the doctrine of fallacies and then asks for the answer. Here first is the question, and then the correct answer is given. Thus negating the fallacies of american company ''Watchtower''-which appeared 1846 (!) Years after the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ and the Apostles, the Fathers, Saints, and real witnesses of Christ. How many dozens of times we've seen in science fiction movies, a hero with the freeze method cryogenic, and when he wakes up after decades, or thousands of years all around are different, he has no idea what the intervening years so that we sleeps.Exactly,in that way, the company perspective comes to teach us a new Gospel, eighteen centuries after the early Christian years! The point is the deluded sheep-the prodigal sons to understand the lies and deception and to think very seriously about what they will do with their souls and eternity.

1) Question: For the "Watchtower", "that the soul lives after death is a lie told by the Devil" ("You can live ...", pp. 88, 89). Consequently, the existence of saints and their effect on our lives is presented as another lie of the devil. Question: if the soul dies,how could the rich have a conversation in Hades,how does he asks for some dew from the finger of Lazarus-and tell to God to send notice to his brothers? (Speech, hearing, feeling, etc.).does the Bible says lies? (Luke 16:19-31) The soul and eternity According to the Witnesses, man does not have a soul. He is a soul. "Adam was a soul .… The lower animals also are souls …. Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in the doctrines of eternal torment and immortality of the human soul" (What Do Jehovah's

Witnesses Believe?, 3-4). Thus in a few sentences do they deny several basic Christian doctrines which are clearly taught in Scripture and by all the Fathers of the Church. As for hell, although few things are so clearly taught in Scripture as the existence of an eternal hell, where the wicked will be punished, the Witnesses reject it. "Once the Devil has invented immortal souls, he had to invent a place somewhere outside heaven or earth for wicked immortal souls to go to. What else could he do but fall back on eternal conscious torment as the explanation?" (Cole, 163). The Witnesses do not believe God will punish sinners. "The Bible does not teach that man possesses an 'immortal soul' that can endure endless roasting in torment" (Cole, 72). The world already belongs to the Devil. " God never punishes either in this life nor in the next," declared Russell. There is no hell. Russell says that all are to be raised again and given a second chance. So everything depends on how we behave then, not on how we behave now. The more wicked a man has been in this life, the more likely he is to make good in the next. Even if he doesn't make good and continues to defy God with contempt, he will simply be put out of existence and experience no future evil consequences whatever. Sacraments and prayer Witnesses teach nothing about the Eucharist and other sacraments. They are almost completely ignored, as are so many other vital Christian truths. The purpose of baptism is obscure. Further, you will search Witnesses' literature in vain for any coherent teaching on prayer and Christian perfection. The great saints of God are apparently as much children of the devil as the rest of us. They have no significance whatever for the Witnesses.

Testimony of Scripture for soul and Hades Characteristics, however, is the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, are the second and third chapters of the Book of Wisdom of Solomon. Typically we read verses 1-4, the third chapter of the book

"1 But the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no torment will ever touch them. 2 In the eyes of the foolish they seemed to have died, and their departure was

thought to be an affliction, 3 and their going from us to be their destruction; but they are at peace. 4 For though in the sight of men they were punished, their hope is full of immortality''. (Wisdom of Solomon 3 / c: 1-4). But the same hope and faith prevailed in the time of Christ. So Christ also checked the Sadducees, who themselves do not believe the immortality of the soul and the resurrection. ''For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit; but the Pharisees confess both''. And there arose a great cry, and the scribes who were on the Pharisees‘ side arose and strove, saying, ―We find no evil in this man; but if a spirit or angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.‖ (Acts 23:8). And even the Lord checked them saying: "But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, ‗I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob‘? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." (Matthew 22/: 31.32). In other words, to prove that Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob were not dead, because that would be set by invoking God of the dead, but instead the patriarchs were alive. Alive also was Moses, even though he had physically died, when he appeared together with the prophet Elijah on Mount Tabor, at the transformation of Christ and spoke. There was'nt a fad of the students, nor optical illusions or magic tricks, because God does not use such instruments. And the disciples did not surprised at all, but instead Peter proposed to build the scene to stay there. So,it was clear and correct the perception of Jews on the immortal soul (not by nature, but by the Grace of God), and of course the same concept teached by Christ, and later by his students. Thus, in the letter to the Hebrews we read: "But ye have come unto Mount Zion and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn, who are written in Heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect" (Hebrews 12/:

22-23). In this passage, the sacred author names the incomparable superiority of the New Testament from the Old, and the values whoever enjoys as a shareholder. So says those who come to the Church, that come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem is the city of the living God and in celebration of myriads of angels, and Church firstborn, whose names are written in heaven, and spirits laws of men made perfect'. These are the souls of the righteous who have died while physically but present perfect to virtue near God. "spirits of just men made perfect". So these souls, with main representative the father of the faith, the patriarch of the Jews Abraham welcomed the soul of righteous Lazarus of the parable. The sacred Ecclesiastes Our brothers Jehovah's Witnesses claim the verse Ecclesiastes 3, 18-21, to document their teaching that man is not a soul, which remains alive after the death of the body. But,the sacred Ecclesiastes although he writes with the wisdom given to him by God, is not mentioned anywhere that says "full of the Holy Spirit," or, even more, that God speaks with his mouth as he speaks with the mouth of the prophets . He writes and speaks as a man so why is sad and disappointed, "I said in my heart about the state of the sons of men" (stich. 18). For this reason you should interpret literally what it says about the dead. This becomes evident from the following: a) The refrain of "vanity of vanities, all is vanity" can not be interpreted literally, then why should we consider "futility" also to worship God and to do His will. b) Ecclesiastes speaks as if there will never be a resurrection of the dead. Didn't he know that there will be resurrection? However, if he knew, if he had taken into account in his text, would not compare humans with animals. Humans are animals - unless the animals will resurrected! Let us keep in mind that he had not yet become the incarnation of Christ and the death had not been defeated yet. The desperation Ecclesiastes speaks about death, because he is still in the Old Testament. c) In the next verse 22, writes the following surprising: "Wherefore I saw that there is nothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his works; for that is his portion: for

who shall bring him back to see what shall be after him? That ratio can not be accepted by a Christian - being rejoices in his works refers to the parable of the rich fool (Luke 12, 13-21). For the Christian, this is the largest "futility", while it is best to rejoice about his relationship with God and prepare for His kingdom. d) Even the famous coda of the book, where he talks about faith and worship of God, contains no theological meaning nor negate the tremendous pessimism. Not even mention the kingdom of God, or even the love of Him as a reason to do His will.

There are however many parts in Bible (especially the New Testament), showing clearly that Jesus and the writers of divinely inspired books consider the afterlife of souls so obvious, but the thought that ''our grandmother and all traditional Christians'' of all generations (often nowadays, arrogant, despise them as 'primitive' and / or 'illiterate'). Let's look at some of these points.

Abraham, Moses and the God of the living 1. At the Lord's transfiguration on Mount Tabor (Matthew 17, 1-13, Mark. 9, 2-13, Luke 9, 28-36 appeared next to the prophets Moses and Elijah. The prophet Elijah, as we know, not dead, but "was taken to heaven in a chariot of fire" according to the narrative of the Old Testament in the book of Kings D, 2, 11 (ie within the uncreated Light, when the saint Ancient Orthodox Church and continuity). Tabor came therefore to some place where alive. Moses next apparently came from the place of souls. Denying the life of souls after death, claiming that there was no real presence of the two men in the transformation, just because Jesus describes as "vision" experience of the three disciples (Matthew 17, 9). But it was not a mirage without real content, because the two men "discussed" with Jesus for the forthcoming passion (Lk. 9, 31) and even appeared while students initially were not watching, but "were heavy with sleep" (stich. 32). So He was indeed present. Besides, however, the word "vision" in the Bible is not only a symbolic vision, but also a realistic vision and recorded (eg Acts of Apostles 9, 10., 10, 3. 18, 9).

This fact alone, is enough to prove, at least to someone who considers valid in the Bible, that souls live after death of the body.

2. In the gospel of John, 8, 56, the Lord says to his listeners: "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and He saw it and was glad." ''Day of the Lord" is a phrase that used in the Old Testament by God Himself meaning the coming of Christ or His Second Coming (eg Amos 5, 18 and 20, Joel 2, 1 and 11, Joel 3 , 14, Isa. 2, 12, Iez. 30, 3 etc.). In the second meaning,the term is used in the New Testament (eg B Pet. 3, 10), and is "day of the Lord Jesus," "days of the Son of man" or "day of Christ" (p . example, Luke 17, 24, John 8, 56, I Cor 1, 8 and 5, 5, 1 Cor B, 14 B Thess. 1, 2, Philip. 1, 10). Here of course obviously meant the birth of Christ, which, as he says, "saw" and Abraham rejoiced. What did he saw, if he was already dead more than two millennia? He saw his soul. Here we should mention the appearance of two saints of the Old Testament, departed years, the dream of Judas Maccabees in the Old Testament book of II Maccabees, chapter 15, 11-17: High Priest of GVIA (185-174 BC) and the prophet Jeremiah, who came to pray for the people of God and even Jeremiah gave a golden sword (symbolically, the blessing of God) in Judas Maccabee to defeat the oppressors of the people and destroyers of worship of God. This appearance for the Orthodox means a lot, but,for Protestants apparently means nothing, because the B Maccabees. included in 10 books removed from the Old Testament, when rejected the text of O (= Septuagint), ie the Greek Old Testament (the one that uses the New Testament and the Christians generally to Luther) and adopted the Masoretic, ie the Hebrew text of Old Testament. These books were written in Greek from the start, so it was not included in the Hebrew Bible, and therefore not included in the Protestant Bible that are used by the Jehovah's Witnesses (as Protestants) and all other branches of Protestantism.

The prophet Jeremiah. The parchment writes words of God, by the teaching of the prophet Jeremiah: ―Am I a God at hand,‖ saith the Lord, ―and not a God afar off? (the prophetic book of Jeremiah, chapter 23:23).

3. In Matt. 22, 31-32, the Lord says, '' But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,‗I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob‘? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living''. These words are only meaningful if the three referred saints were alive at the same time that the Lord spoke. Because if you were dead, even temporarily (until the resurrection), even if a person has been dead for even a moment, then He is not only God of the living,but AND God of the dead! On condition of course we accept that God is everything.

4. Based on the above, we understand correctly and John 11:26: ''and whosoever liveth and believeth in Me shall never die. Believest thou this''? (every human who believes in me will never die), and John 5:24, where the Lord says: Verily, verily I say unto you, he that heareth My Word and believeth in Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death unto life. Where "eternal life", no lag on death, only the instantaneous event. That is, from the time of death already "moved" from death to life-in these words does not remain "empty space" between death and eternal life.

The invitation to the dead 5. At the same John:5,28-29 we read: ''Marvel not at this; for the hour is coming in which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice and shall come forth — they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation''. From these words we conclude the following: a) while people are still dead ("the graves" = inside the graves) will hear the call of the Son of God and will get resurrected - so the souls are alive, because they can hear the

call b) all will be resurrected, the hand of eternal life, not for "hell", which will lead to vicious, they have committed. The last we need below. That all will be resurrected, and not only saved (as they think the J.W's), seen from elsewhere, stating clearly that "all nations" will be gathered in front of Jesus at His Second Coming and will speak and saved and the "condemned" (Mt 25, 31-46). (I put "hell" and "convicted" in quotes because, as we know, this is not a punishment from God, but from the eternal state in which they brought the unrepentant sinners themselves-which I hope will not be included also us). So when he says just before, at John 5:25,''and they that hear shall live'' means all people (as indeed has said that "the dead" will hear His voice, so everyone, not only "some dead" or even "many dead"), and not just some people. An objection to this could be said that the Lord speaks with anthropomorphic symbolism when he says that "we will hear His voice" (as the Holy Prophet Ezekiel in chapter 37, which, with God's command, "ordering" the dry bones to become flesh and spirit and preserve). Besides souls are clearly not inside the tombs. So grave is the symbol of status of the deceased. There are the remains of the body and hence there will come the resurrected people. For the symbolism of the call, however, we should note that the Lord raised up the daughter of Jairus, the son of the widow at Nain and St. Lazarus in exactly this way: he called them, he says that will call the dead (cf. Mk. 5, 41, Luke 7, 14, John 11, 43). And I do not think it is fair to say that just because he "had a bit to do it," or, more to impress viewers with a "theatrical" move. The simplistic interpretation is obvious that Jesus did not fit. Even the apostle Paul in the First Thessalonians. 4, 16, writes that the Lord will descend from heaven "in keleysmati" (= with a shout), "the voice of the archangel and the trumpet of God" and will follow the resurrection of the dead. And the prophetic experience of Ezekiel the "order" to the dead was not a figure of speech, but foreshadowing the Act will make the Lord as clearly mentioned in verses Iez. 37, 11-14 (it should be noted that the Lord speaks to Ezekiel says it will do what Jesus says He will do, so the Lord Ezekiel know as Orthodox, not the Father, but the Son).

By the way, why the dead bodies of Ezekiel, once restored, needed also and "spirit" to live, if "there is no particular spiritual part of man," as they think the J.W's? Because the soul is always alive, so that is why the Lord said to the daughter of Jairus that "she is not dead, but sleeping" and the Saint Lazarus that "slept" (Mark 5, 39, John 11, 11 ): man, when asleep, unconscious of alert or become aware of its existence, but his mind is present, awake, is "in him" and has full consciousness. If the deceased is completely lost until the resurrection, there is no point to characterize the "deceased". The "prize" of Apostle Paul 6. In the letter to the Philippians, 1, 23, St. Paul says that he wishes strongly "For I am in a strait between the two, having a desire to depart and to be with Christ, which is far better;" (to dissolve [= die] and be close to Christ). This amazing testimony proves beyond any doubt that the holy apostle, immediately after death, followed by the coexistence with Christ. If he believed that he would remain dead until the Second Coming, He could be so intensely craves for is to die after his death with Christ, as he was while living with Him. For the case of Paul-on this point- J.W's teach that Paul "knew that would be included in the 144,000 saints of Revelation, that the" angelic bodies "are already in heaven with Christ," in contrast to other people who will "sleep" until the resurrection. They claim even the verse the apostle Philip. 3, 14 'by purpose chase for the prize of the top call of God in Jesus Christ "(I run to the top prize of call of God in Christ Jesus) as an argument for that, supposedly, knew what the post place of death (the "upper call" to 144,000 saints). Conversely, however, seems to be trying here to receive this award, so much craves (not because they are insincere, but because the "prize" is the eternal coexistence of the beloved Jesus). Similarly, a little above the Philippians. 3, 7-11, it is clear that Paul did not feel at all sure of the location close to the Lord. Having listed his efforts to be consistent Christian concludes: (and maybe end up in the resurrection of the dead). Since all the dead will be resurrected-as mentioned above-the apostle here clearly means salvation, ie participation in the heavenly glory of Christ, which we commonly call "paradise." However, the fact is that there appears to be some "information" on the post mortem conclusion is. The preaching of Christ to the dead

7. A letter to the holy apostle Peter, 3, 19-20, states that the Lord, during the three-day death, "He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who had once apeithisei when waiting for the forbearance of God, the days of Noah'' ... etc.). The J'W's interpret this verse as referring to the "sons of God" who crave the daughters of men and joined them (Genesis 6, 1-4), who, according to them, were angels who "realized" mated with women and men born giants. 6, 4. But this interpretation suffers in two ways: a) What sense had to go to the Lord and preached to fallen angels? Does they going to repent and to be saved? Nowhere seems that - unlike the fallen angels are unrepentant. Instead, declare the dead people who were in "Hades" had huge meaning: thus giving them the opportunity to save, that is to be judged along with the AD people and unite with them in the kingdom of God. This is the chance of the ancient dead, not some "temporary" resurrection, between death and the Last Judgment, to "learn the commandments of God" and "testing" faith and morality, as they think the J'W's. In all the Bible references to the resurrection and Last Judgment (Matthew 25, 31-46, John 5, 28, Daniel 7, 9-10, B Thess., 1, 6-11, B Peter chapter 3, etc.) appears to mediate some space therebetween. Besides, "it is once per mankind to die, but after this critical" (reserved for men to die once and after this, judgment, Heb. 9, 27). There is a death, and therefore one resurrection, and references in Chapter 20 of Revelation in the "first resurrection" and "the second death" must be understood spiritually, otherwise inconsistent with the foregoing. b) A little further down, I Peter 4, 6, states that the Lord "and evingelisthi corpses" (gave the message of the gospel to the dead)! Here J'W's writes that refers to "spiritually dead", ie people distant from God. But then what are the "living" since before Christ all people were spiritually dead. Besides, if you read here about "spiritual death" because they do not accept and that the "first resurrection" of Revelation is "spiritual resurrection," ie the integration of the human "body of Christ", the Church? Let us mention that the descent of Christ into Hades announced in the Old Testament where the prophet and king David, in Psalm 23 (in the Protestant Bible-and-J'W's following the Hebrew numbering, has the number 24), verse. 7-10, writes:

Lift up your heads, O ye gates! And be ye lifted up, ye everlasting doors! And the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle. Lift up your heads, O ye gates! Even lift them up, ye everlasting doors! And the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory? The Lord of hosts, He is the King of glory. Selah

The 'eternal gates', as it is eternal, it can not be any earthly city gates. These are the "gates of hell" mentioned several times in the Old Testament (Isaiah 38, 10. Wisdom of Solomon 16, 13. Maccabees C 5, 51), but Christ in Matt. 16, 18. As we know, Jesus refers to the Bible as a king (eg Matthew 25, 31-34, stating that the Second Coming will sit "on the throne of Glory", while the apostle Paul describes the "Lord of Glory" stating that he had indeed already that capacity beforehand crucified "for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory".(I Corinthians 2, 8). The "King of Glory" So entering the eternal gates, is Christ and enters the Underworld as a conqueror and liberator. Note that this Psalm is Psalm "one of the Sabbaths", ie the first day of the week, the day on which the resurrected Lord (Matthew 28, 1) and the Christians from the earliest years call Sunday (Revelation 1, 10).

A Thess. 4, 16-17: Two resurrections? Here I must mention one reference that can be used to argue that there will be "two resurrections' is 1 Thess. 4, 16b-17: "16 For the Lord Himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so shall we ever be with the Lord''. This verse can mean: a) first will resurrected the "dead in Christ", ie Christians, and then everyone else, b) first be resurrected dead (all) "in Christ", ie the resurrection of the dead will be "in Christ", by the grace of strength and "callings" of Christ, and then those who are left alive will be caught up together with them in the air resurrected etc. Whatever that means, however, even if a valid version, it follows that there will be two

resurrections (immediately after the rest will be raised). Besides, if it were argued that those who did not know the message of Christ in their lives, they will know after his resurrection and then will be judged, should rise first "other" and the latter "in Christ."

The "cloud of witnesses" 8. In Hebrews, 11, 32-40, St. Paul lists the suffering of the saints until then (especially the Old Testament) for their faith and concludes that, nevertheless, "not what they were promised, as God foresaw something better for us, so do not reach perfection without us''. Here,a J W's could say that the implied lack of man in space between death and the resurrection. However, immediately to the following (11, 1) the apostle says: "So we, us both having around cloud of witnesses'' ... etc.

I wonder in what sense the witnesses are "cloud" that "our surrounds"? Although one could, arbitrarily, consider the simple expression of the apostle literary device, but the picture in the text is clear: the souls of witnesses 'fly around' like a cloud (fog, because this cloud surrounds the people, not the clouds of heaven): dense (because of the crowd), "intangible" and transparent, like the Cloud.

The thief on the cross and "Abraham's bosom"

The Saints' Day (= all the saints). In the lower part of the picture depicts the "Abraham's bosom" (right), Jacob showing his children in the Lord (perhaps symbolic reference in Isaiah 8, 18) and the average thief who was saved by the crucifixion (from here). 9. Direct evidence for the life of souls is obvious to the ancient Orthodox Church and the word of the Lord to the thief on the cross "truth I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23, 43). The view of J W's that the Lord said, "I tell you truth today(,) you will be with me in paradise", is logically untenable; every respect "today" would be superfluous, let alone a man nailed to the cross, not afford to say unnecessary words.

10. We left past the famous parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16, 19-31). There the souls of two people meet in Hades, while the rich state of perpetual thirst of Lazarus is not in a state of pleasure. The second fact rests "within" (in lap) of Abraham, and Abraham conversing with the rich. These descriptions, according to J W's do not mean nothing at all about the state of man after death. It's literary device of Jesus, to pass the philanthropic message. Of course, we can not agree. The Lord here gives an incentive for listeners: if they behave with kindness,they will be found in "Abraham's bosom", and if they live with cruelty and spend their

wealth only for themselves, they will find themselves "in this

place of suffering ", as says the wealthy (vs. 28) agonize-ing the fate of the five brothers! If the place of suffering and the Bossom of Abraham did not exist, then forgive me-God-the Lord gave fake motivation to His listeners, ie He cheated! How someone struggling to avoid the fate of the rich and enjoy the luck of Lazarus, if all this was nothing but empty rhetoric? If the Lord was talking about a future kingdom,He could well place the scene in the future, while now refers to present time,that the five brothers of the rich were still living on earth. Besides, if the Lord was using empty rhetoric or literary discoveries in parables, we must accept that it could be reported even in ... Jupiter. But what is the "Abraham's bosom?" This certainly is a symbolic picture. It symbolizes something but not nil, but the affection and security man feels in heaven - and perhaps to communicate with the spirits of the saints who surround him with fatherly holy love. I would venture to say that the "Abraham's bosom" is the foretaste of salvation, salvation would be indescribable in its fullness at the Second Coming and the resurrection of all the dead. Reference to the spiritual symbolism of the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus becomes saints and teachers of the ancient and the Orthodox Church. See the teaching of Saint Macrina the immortality of the soul, as shown in a shocking dialogue-just before she died-with her brother St. Gregory of Nyssa, in which he recorded under the title "The Makrineia - the soul and the resurrection", par 45-52.

ALSO, HOW CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE AFTER-DEATH EXPERIENCES? Outstanding is a similar case of a blind woman 70 years old who lost her light at the age of 18. After her '' return'' she described to the doctor the tools he used. Tools that did not exist 52 years ago when she still see - proof that she was telling the truth! Even if - for the disbelievers - the external do not prove that there is continuity after death, it is certain that definitively prove the existence of the soul.

Saint Stephen's at his stoning time saw the heavens open and Christ seated at God's right. The Apostle Paul was snatched up to the third heaven and heard ineffable verbs-(I know a man in Christ who lived and who fourteen years ago-whether lay in his body during the one hour did not know was whether out of the body I do not know , God knows)-grabbing and had been taken to the third heaven. And I know that this man-whether in the body outside the body, I do not know, God knowsravished until heaven and listened to words that the human language can not be articulate and which is not man Delegate probably say to them and their revelations. '' No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no calculus put'' for what God has prepared for those who love him. What can we see here? 1) WHERE IS THE PARADISE ON EARTH-THAT THE ''WATCHTOWER'' CLAIMS? 2) If it is correct the falsehood -that the soul dies,why the Apostle Paul did not know that HE WAS NOT DEAD and saw that? CONCLUSION The body that is made of soil, decays, and return back to earth until the Second Coming that will be resurrected and become indestructible. But the soul is immortal and lives forever. For the salvation of it,it is worth all the sacrifices,even the lost of the body.

2) Question: What do you know about the New Age-New World Order? Is faith in God an obstruction for Globalization? Is it reasonable the'' Master of this century'' to want to destruct the Right Faith by

creating obstructions?(E.g. Heresies). Beware of Watchtower Magazine Titus 1:10,11, ―For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers... Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.‖ Sadly, as sincere as most of them may be, the Jehovah's Witnesses are a false religion, teaching lies and false doctrines against the Scriptures. The Jehovah's Witnesses preach a FALSE gospel, mandating water baptism, and requiring people to stop sinning in order to be saved. The group also requires membership into the Kingdom Hall for a person to get to heaven. These are false doctrines. The Jehovah's Witnesses deny several fundamental doctrine of the Word of God, including the deity of Jesus, the Godhead, the bodily resurrection of Christ and salvation without works by faith alone in Jesus Christ. They also teach the false doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration, i.e., that water baptism is mandatory for salvation. The Jehovah's Witnesses are a false cult, known for their public outreach. If only Baptists and other genuine Christian groups would work as hard to reach society with the Gospel. It is a shame that a false cult is more energetic and persistent in propagating their heresies, than truly born-again Christians are about soul winning with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. WATCHTOWER magazines are highly appealing to people because of the superb artistic quality and vivid colors, which are pleasing to the eyes. Unfortunately, the magazine is filled with unbiblical teachings which lead men, women and children into false religion and away from the truth of God's Word. Jehovah's Witnesses are very subtle in their writings, sounding very much like true Christians; but they are not! They don't make it as obvious that they teach Jesus was only Michael the archangel incarnate. This is what Jehovah's Witnesses believe! There is not one single Scripture in all the Bible that says, nor even implies, that Michael became Jesus. It is utter blasphemy!!!

WATCHTOWER magazine is of the Devil. Please throw them away if you have any in your home. When Jehovah's Witnesses come to my door, I receive their literature just so I can throw it away after they leave, but first I write the word ―heresy‖ across the front cover, just in case the garbage man doesn't recognize the magazine as garbage.

ALSO: What do you know about Helena Blavatsky-founder of the movement of the'' New Age'' that began in 1875 - JUST FOUR YEARS BEFORE Russell started the'' Bible Students'' and sent on his mission by ... God? Also,what is the ''Good News'' that the ''Watchtower'' speaks for? Does Satan wants to hear words as: Gospel, Cross, incense, confession, Divine Communion? How much '' New'' are the ''Good News'' if the Organization means the Gospel-which is 2000 years old? Why does ''WATCHTOWER'' speaks for New world of God'',for ''System of things'' and for ''New World order of Jehowah''(!!!),and many other new-age designations? In what point (the original,the Ancient) Scripture speaks for ''system'' or ''system of things''? (ANCIENT TEXT TO ANSWER PLEASE). This question is,because,the New World Order awaits the Antichrist-as a Messiah. The reign of the Antichrist will be the culmination of the New World Order...

3) Question: Is that the Organization of God? How can we conclude this? The other Churches is ... ''Of Satan''? Finally what the ''Watchtower'' is? a Company? a Religion? an Organization? Jehovah does not need an organization, nor has he used an organization for most of human history. For 2,500 years, from creation until the Israelites, there is no mention of any organization. God dealt directly with individuals. From the death of the Apostles until the formation of the Watchtower Society in the 1800's, what group represented God's organisation? The most important concept behind being a Jehovah's Witness is that you need to follow the Watchtower organization for salvation. This article shows that there is no legitimate basis for such a concept. The word "Organization" is not in the Bible, yet appears 16,789 times on the 2006 Watchtower Library CD. Early Christians were organised into congregations, as are Christian religions today. For the spread of Christianity it may be necessary to create organisations. For example,

in modern times religious groups often need to establish legal entities or organisations in order to purchase halls to meet in and for the publication of literature. The Watchtower Society goes a step further by saying that being part of their particular Organization is an essential requirement of salvation. The leaders of the Watchtower Society, the Governing Body, are said to be appointed by Christ and the only means by which he directs his true followers today. "Consider, too, the fact that Jehovah's organization alone, in all the earth, is directed by God's holy spirit or active force. (Zech. 4:6) Only this organization functions for Jehovah's purpose and to his praise. To it alone God's Sacred Word, the Bible, is not a sealed book." Watchtower 1973 Jul 1 p.402 "However, the Governing Body are appointed through the holy spirit under the direction of Jehovah God and Jesus Christ." Watchtower 1990 Mar 15 p.18 "These overseers faithfully seek to apply instructions received from Jehovah God and Jesus Christ by means of the faithful and discreet slave and its Governing Body." Watchtower 1990 Mar 15 p.20 "Christ thus leads the congregation by means of the spirit-anointed "faithful and discreet slave" and its Governing Body." Examining the Scriptures Daily 2007 p.34 This is the most significant concept behind being a Jehovah's Witness. Believing in God is not what makes a Witness unique, as a large portion of people believe in God. Trusting in the Bible is not the key factor to being a Witness, as billions of people believe they follow the Bible. It is belonging to the "Organization" that distinguishes a Witness and makes them feel solely worthy of salvation. The word organization never appears in the Bible, yet organization appears 16,789 times on the 2006 Watchtower Library CD. This is because belonging to an organization is not a Scriptural requirement, but rather a common concept amongst high control groups as a technique of building a member's high degree of conviction and uniformity. This raises the following questions; Is membership of an organization essential for salvation?

Has Jehovah always operated through an organization? Requirement of Salvation The Watchtower claims that belonging to an organization is essential for salvation. "To receive everlasting life in the earthly Paradise we must identify that organization and serve God as part of it." Watchtower 1983 Feb 15 p.12 Yet the word "organization" never appears in the Bible, nor is it ever stated in either the Old or New Testaments that membership of an organization is a requirement of salvation. The Scriptures repeatedly state that it is faith in Jesus and the Father that results in everlasting life. "... obtain the salvation that is in union with Christ Jesus along with everlasting glory." 2 Timothy 2:10 "For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life ... He that exercises faith in the Son has everlasting life." John 3:16, 36 "And yet YOU do not want to come to me that YOU may have life." John 5:40 "I am the door; whoever enters through me will be saved, and he will go in and out and find pasturage." John 10:9 "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ." John 17:3 "Hence let no one be boasting in men; for all things belong to YOU, whether Paul or Apol'los or Ce'phas or the world or life or death or things now here or things to come, all things belong to YOU; in turn YOU belong to Christ; Christ, in turn, belongs to God." 1 Corinthians 3:21

To appreciate the level of adulation Watchtower followers are expected to have for the organisation, it is revealing that the Watchtower April 2013 study article titled "Make Sure of the More Important Things" uses the term "organization" 24 times, but Jesus only 18 times. The following article then contains an image outlining the composition

of the organisation that does not even include Jesus, but rather the Governing Body directly below Jehovah on his throne. The Watchtower 1975 Sep 1 p.531 asks "Where could we turn if we would leave God's organization today? There is nowhere else! (John 6:66-69)". This quote refers to John 6:66-69 for support that there is nowhere other than the Organization. However, John makes a very different point: "Simon Peter answered him: "Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life."" John 6:68 One cannot help but wonder how Jesus feels having the Watchtower Society applying this Scripture to themselves, rather than to him. Does God require an Organization? As the word "organization" does not appear in the Bible, the Watchtower uses 1 Corinthians 14:33 - "God is a God, not of disorder, but of peace" - to indicate that an Organization is necessary. However, the existence of an organization does not guarantee order, nor is an organization a prerequisite for orderliness. This does not mean that organization is not necessary. People need to be organised for efficient operation of congregations and preaching. Rather, it is unquestioning allegiance to the leaders of an Organization that is not supported Scripturally. In an attempt to enforce the authority of the Watchtower Society, articles claim God has always operated though a single organization. "The Bible shows that Jehovah has always guided his servants in an organized way The nation of Israel was called "Jehovah's congregation." (Numbers 20:4; 1 Chronicles 28:8) If you were a true worshiper of Jehovah back then, you had to be part of that congregation of worshipers, not separate from it. Did Jehovah ever use more than one organization during any period of time? In Noah's day only Noah and those with him inside the ark had God's protection and survived the floodwaters. (1 Peter 3:20) Also, in the first century there were not two or more Christian organizations. God dealt with just the one. There was just the "one Lord, one faith, one baptism." (Ephesians 4:5) Likewise in our day Jesus Christ foretold that there would be only one source of spiritual instruction for God's people." You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth p.192

Bible history proves that this is not the case. For the majority of history God has not used any organization. He predominantly has operated through individuals, and has regularly dealt with more than one group at a time. Originally God dealt directly with Adam and Eve. He continued to deal directly with Abel, and also directly with the unrighteous man Cain. (Gen 4:15) For the next 2000 years there is no mention of any organization or intervention by God, except for when God deal with two individuals; Enoch and Noah. After the flood, Jehovah continued to deal with individuals rather than with an organization. He concurrently dealt separately with individuals such as Lot and Abraham. Israel There is only one period of time during which it can be claimed that God dealt with an organization. This was not until 2,500 years after the creation of mankind, with the formation of the Nation of Israel under Moses. Yet even whilst he dealt through this group, he continued to deal with individuals and other groups. During the time of the nation of Israel, Jehovah dealt with individuals not associated with the Israelites. For example, it was during this time that Jehovah was involved directly with Job, a man "blameless and upright, and fearing God and turning aside from bad the greatest of all the Orientals. (Job 1:1-3) After many decades, Jehovah instituted a King in Israel. This was not will, but because of their insistence on requiring a visible king. This desire for a human leader was considered a rejection of Jehovah, who stated: "… it is I whom they have rejected from being king over them." 1 Samuel 8:7. During the history of Israel, God did not deal only with the King. In fact Saul, the very first king, attempted to kill David and so David fled to live in the apostate land of Philistia with Achish the king of Gath, all the time protected by Jehovah. Jehovah also operated through Levites, the Priests and a variety of Bible writers of diverse stations. He regularly rose up independent prophets to chastise his erring kingly representative. Generally these individual prophets were sent by Jehovah to condemn the Israelites. What cannot be overlooked is that from the first leader and for most of its history,

Israel were apostate rejecters of Jehovah. At the death of only the third king Jehovah foretold "Here I am ripping the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and I shall certainly give you ten tribes. And the one tribe is what will continue his for the sake of my servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem, the city that I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel." (1 Kings 11:31-32) After Solomon's death God proceeded to split the Israelites into two separate nations, each with their own priestly class. Until the destruction of Israel, Jehovah dealt with the Northern kingdom separately from the Southern kingdom. For a short time after the fall of Jerusalem, God continued to deal directly with individuals, such as Daniel. After the release from Babylon, God was with Ezra and Nehemiah and was involved with the rebuilding of the temple. Then a period of 500 years ensued with no record of any intervention from God until the time of Jesus, no evidence that God actively dealt through this visible organization. Christian Times When Jesus arrived, the priesthood was still God's representative. The Jews were considered to be God's Nation until the the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. However Jesus and his disciples stood up against that organisation and publicly condemned the Priests, in effect setting up a second rival organization to the one still representing God. While this second group was following Jesus, the Bible shows that there were individuals unattached to Jesus followers whose worship was also considered acceptable. "John said to him: "Teacher, we saw a certain man expelling demons by the use of your name and we tried to prevent him, because he was not accompanying us." But Jesus said: "Do not try to prevent him, for there is no one that will do a powerful work on the basis of my name that will quickly be able to revile me; for he that is not against us is for us. For whoever gives YOU a cup of water to drink on the ground that YOU belong to Christ, I truly tell YOU, he will by no means lose his reward. But whoever stumbles one of these little ones that believe, it would be finer for him if a millstone such as is turned by an ass were put around his neck and he were actually pitched into the sea." Mark 9:38-42

Here Jesus shows that a person could belong to him without following the group of apostles. Belonging to an organization was not as important as it was to "belong to Christ". After Jesus death, his disciples actively went against the nation of Israel and the high priest, even whilst they were still considered God's earthly representative. Acts 5:27-29 describes such an occasion; "And the high priest questioned them and said: "We positively ordered YOU not to keep teaching upon the basis of this name, and yet, look! YOU have filled Jerusalem with YOUR teaching, and YOU are determined to bring the blood of this man upon us." In answer Peter and the [other] apostles said: "We must obey God as ruler rather than men." During all this time, early Christianity was loosely structured, unlike the Watchtower organisation today. There was no formal incorporation and no multibillion dollar property empire of kingdom halls and Bethel buildings. How Directed? "But in reply he said: "I tell YOU, If these remained silent, the stones would cry out."" Luke 19:40 Presuming that God needs an earthly organization shows lack of faith in his ability to operate through individuals. Early Christians were not directed by an organization but by the words of Jesus and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. "I have many things yet to say to YOU, but YOU are not able to bear them at present. However, when that one arrives, the spirit of the truth, he will guide YOU into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own impulse, but what things he hears he will speak, and he will declare to YOU the things coming." John 16:12-13 Jesus promised that he would direct his followers no matter how few were gathered together. "Where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst!" Matthew 18:20

It was under the guidance of Holy Spirit that followers of Jesus accomplished their work. " with the power of signs and portents, with the power of holy spirit; so that from Jerusalem and in a circuit as far as Illyricum I have thoroughly preached the good news about the Christ." Romans 15:19 Acts 2:1-4 describes the Holy Spirit speaking truth through 120 disciples and Acts 4:31 says; "… they were one and all filled with the holy spirit and were speaking the word of God with boldness." Christian congregations met in houses with like minded people worshipping Christ. Paul explained this was for "upbuilding" each other (1 Corinthians 14:5). Holy Spirit appointed mature older men to overseer (Acts 20) whilst the older women were teachers of good (Titus 2:3, 4). There was freedom within congregations to discuss different points of view without fear of retribution, as shown by open discussion on circumcision. Consensus was reached at Acts 15 that circumcision was not required, but that it was necessary to abstain "from things sacrificed to idols (v29)". Yet even this statement was not binding regulation, since Paul later explained at 1 Corinthians 8 that food sacrificed to idols need only be avoided if eating it would cause a brother to stumble. The formation of congregations indicates order, but does not imply an elite group of specially directed leaders in a position to demand unquestioning obedience. Conclusion The Watchtower Society is described as Jehovah's "wife" and "earthly instrument". "However, what we see exemplified in God's woman, his heavenly universal organization, we should look to see in his visible organization. Why? Because his higher, greater universal organization uses it as her earthly instrument. That is why we do see those motherly traits, those traits and acts of a virtuous woman, in the Watchtower Bible School of Gilead and in the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society, because these profess to represent and serve God's woman. We thank God for

providing and using them. So we stand up respectfully and bless his faithful organization, his queenly "woman" in heaven which makes all these loving provisions for us as children of God." Watchtower 1950 October 1 p.348 " Referring to the Watchtower Society as Jehovah's earthly organization creates an air of divine authority. Personification as a motherly woman creates fear of displeasing "her". In reality, the Watchtower Society is a standard company with a Charter incorporated in America. It is a worldly corporation run by progression of men. Like any company, its foremost concern is ultimately growth and financial viability, achieved through book sales and donations. In The Myth of Certainty: The Reflective Christian & the Risk of Commitment (InteVarsity Press, 1986, 1992) pp.29-30 Professor Daniel Taylor warns: "The primary goal of all institutions and subcultures is self-preservation. Preserving the faith is central to God's plan for human history; preserving particular religious institutions is not. Do not expect those who run the institutions to be sensitive to the difference. God needs no particular person, church, denomination, creed or organization to accomplish his purpose." The concept of Jehovah having one single organization that he directs by means of a Governing Body is used to support the concept that being a Jehovah's Witness is essential for salvation. Though the Bible consistently says it is faith in Jesus that is important, the Watchtower shifts attention to the Organization with statements such as "we must uphold the truth of that organization." (Watchtower 1961 May 1 p.276) The Governing Body uses this principle to set itself as a spiritual authority above the Bible, such as when stating: "Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible. For this reason the Bible cannot be properly understood without Jehovah's visible organization in mind." Watchtower 1967 Oct 1 p.587 Though an organization is never mentioned by Jesus, Jehovah's Witnesses believe that all other Christian religions will be destroyed by God, because they do not follow Watchtower defined truth. Jesus said "He that believes has everlasting life"(John 6:47) and "I know my sheep and my sheep know me"(John 10:14). When a Jehovah's Witness reads passages like these they are trained to understand "whoever believes what the

Watchtower says about Jesus may have everlasting life", and "the sheep know me, only by means of the Watchtower Society". This is not unique; it is common that "the cult and its beliefs become the only true path to salvation." (Combating Cult Mind Control, Hassan, p.202). It is apparent that for most of the history of the Bible, Jehovah did not have a visible organization. Even during the short period that he used the Nation of Israel, he regularly dealt with individuals in preference to the leaders of that nation. This was also the case during early Christian times. Furthermore, belonging to these groups was no guarantee of being acceptable to God, as from the start both the Jews and early Christians were plagued with corruption and apostasy.

Faithful and Discreet Slave The parable of the faithful and discreet slave is used by the Watchtower Governing Body to justify that they have been appointed by God to lead his people, since 1919. "Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. Truly I say to YOU, He will appoint him over all his belongings." Matthew 24:45-47 This simple parable defines a Jehovah's Witness. The question from Jesus is fundamental to the existence and structure of the religion and is its foundation Scripture. From it extends the concept that in 1919 God chose the leaders of the Watchtower Society as his sole source of truth and henceforth justify why Jehovah's Witnesses need to submit unquestioningly to the Watchtower Governing Body. "―The faithful and discreet slave‖ was appointed over Jesus‘ domestics in 1919. That slave is the small, composite group of anointed brothers serving at world headquarters during Christ‘s presence who are directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food. When this group work together as the Governing Body, they act as ―the faithful and discreet slave.‖" jw.org 10th Nov 2012 "We need to obey the faithful and discreet slave to have Jehovah‘s approval." Watchtower 2011 Jul 15 p.24 Simplified English Edition "[A mature christian] does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbor private

ideas when it comes to Bible understanding. Rather, he has complete confidence in the truth as it is revealed by Jehovah God through his Son, Jesus Christ, and "the faithful and discreet slave." Watchtower 2001 Aug 1 p.14 "Since Jehovah God and Jesus Christ completely trust the faithful and discreet slave, should we not do the same?" Watchtower 2009 Feb 15 p.27 "To act consistently with our baptism for life and into the Greater Noah we must submit to and cooperate with that slave and its legal instrument, the Watch Tower Society." Watchtower 1959 Oct 1 p.583 For many decades, the Slave included all "anointed" Witnesses, but during the 2012 Annual Meeting, the Governing Body assumed this role upon themselves alone. For several years prior to 2012, the Governing Body had been making statements to increase its own authority. "The anointed and their other sheep companions recognize that by following the lead of the modern-day Governing Body, they are in fact following their Leader, Christ." Watchtower 2010 Sep 15 p.23 These grandiose claims have important implications. Truth changes in line with changes of Watchtower interpretation. Conviction that God reveals the Bible through the Watchtower Governing Body affects what a Jehovah's Witness believes regarding doctrine, morals, history and the future, and their actions relating to morals and family. With such all-encompassing power, it does well to prove if God is using these Watchtower leaders. Proof What proof exists to indicate the Governing Body represents the Slave? In Bible times, Jehovah made it simple to recognise those he had chosen to lead his people, through the use of miracles and gifts of the spirit. Watchtower leaders demonstrate none of these indicators. Identifying those used by Jehovah Bible Times Watchtower Governing Body Miracles

Jehovah used miraculous works to identify those chosen to lead others.

For example: Noah - Gathering of the animals

Moses - Staff into a snake Apostles - Gifts of the spirit, such as faith healing

None Prophecy

When Jehovah used a person to make future predictions, the prophecies

were always correct. For example, Daniel's prophecy for the fall of Babylon and the line of world powers

100% of Watchtower predictions have been false, such as that the

end of the world would be in 1914, then 1925, then 1975. Furthermore, the generation teaching promoted prior to 1995 is about to be proven false, as the last survivors born prior to 1914 die out. Consistency Bible is harmonious, with Bible writers presenting a message without contradiction. Watchtower doctrine has been in constant flux. This cannot be explained as new light, as there have been numerous flip flops and contradictions, such as the generation teaching, organ transplants, and superior authorities. As the Watchtower is without clear and visible proof of God's backing, it resorts to unsubstantiated claims of guidance, devoid of any legitimate basis. "OVERWHELMING CREDENTIALS The "faithful and discreet slave" has abundant credentials. Following is a partial list of Scriptural and prophetic designations applying to or being represented in the remnant of Jesus Christ's anointed followers since the notable year 1919:" Watchtower 1981 Mar 1 p.27 The 1981 article follows with a list of 80 "prophetic designations" that the reader is expected to believe foreshadow the modern day slave, including Bible accounts as diverse as "Noah's wife", "Angels sent to Lot" and the "Gleaning left behind". Can these accounts seriously be considered proof that the Watchtower leaders represent the Slave since 1919? Another line of reasoning is that mature Christians will realise that the Watchtower organisation is guided by Jehovah, due to superiority of doctrine, displays of love and growth in membership. "Those mature in Christian growth have, through the Scriptures and the evident manifestation of Jehovah's favor on his faithful and discreet slave, come to appreciate that Jehovah deals with his people as an organization and that his spirit operates in conjunction with that organization. (Matthew 24:45-47)" Watchtower 1958 May 1

p.285 "The abundance of spiritual food and the amazing details of Jehovah's purposes that have been revealed to Jehovah's anointed witnesses are clear evidence that they are the ones mentioned by Jesus when he foretold a "faithful and discreet slave" class" Watchtower 1964 Jun 15 p.365 Is self proclamation of being the Slave proof that this is so? Every religion believes they have Scriptural backing for their beliefs and point to membership numbers as evidence of God's favour. Who is the Slave? The common understanding of the parable of the Slave (or Steward in some Bible translations) is that they are congregational ministers. "Some state that the "slave" refers to Christian ministers, or their office of oversight, with responsibility to care for the spiritual needs of the congregation. The 'master's' arrival is said to be either the second coming of Christ or the death of the individual minister. Thus it is held that the parable should motivate Christian ministers to care well for what is entrusted to them." Watchtower 1981 Mar 1 p.24 In Commentary on Matthew 24, Matthew Henry writes: "Concerning the good servant; he shows here what he is-a ruler of the household; what, being so, he should be-faithful and wise; and what, if he be so, he shall be eternally-blessed. Here are good instructions and encouragements to the ministers of Christ. First, We have here his place and office. ... The church of Christ is his household Secondly, His right discharge of this office. The good servant, if thus preferred, will be a good steward; for, 1. He is faithful; stewards must be so, 1 Co. 4:2. He that is trusted, must be trusty; and the greater the trust is, the more is expected from them. It is a great good thing that is committed to ministers (2 Tim. 1:14); and they must be faithful, as Moses was, Heb. 3:2. Christ counts those ministers, and those only, that are faithful, 1 Tim. 1:12. A faithful minister of Jesus Christ is one that sincerely designs his master's honour, not his own; delivers the whole counsel of God, not his own fancies and conceits; follows Christ's institutions and adheres to them; regards the meanest, reproves the greatest, and doth not respect persons." blueletterbible.org (9 July 2006) In line with this, 1 Corinthians 4:1-2 says; "Let a man so appraise us as being subordinates of Christ and stewards of sacred

secrets of God. Besides, in this case, what is looked for in stewards is for a man to be found faithful." This is not the Watchtower understanding. Watchtower Development

Being a vague parable, the Watchtower has been able to use a range of preconceived notions to arrive at a variety of interpretations for the Slave, highlighted by numerous changes to their Doctrine. Originally, Russell said the Slave was an illustration of the entire body of Christ, the little flock of 144,000 heavenly rulers. ""Who then is that faithful and wise servant whom his Lord hath made ruler over his household," to give them meat in due season? Is it not that "little flock" of consecrated servants who are faithfully carrying out their consecration vows - the body of Christ and is not the whole body individually and collectively, giving the meat in due season to the household of faith - the great company of believers?" Zion's Watch Tower 1881 Oct/Nov p.5 Later, the slave was used to refer to a single person, Pastor Russell. (This interpretation was originally suggested by Russell's wife in a letter dated 1895. See Zion's Watch Tower 1906 Jul 15 pp.215-216 for a reprint of the letter.) Russell was thought to have been appointed as the Slave to direct the domestics (Jesus true followers) immediately prior to the Second Coming. "In our examination of this text we seem to have treated the term "that servant" as though the Spirit had erred in saying "that servant" when it meant servants (plural), and we applied it to all true servants of God. … The objection urged is that the Lord's words clearly mention and distinguish between his "household" (his faithful people in general), the "fellow-servants" (plural) , and "that servant" specially indicated as the Lord's agent in dispensing present truth as food to his "fellow-servants" and the "household." Zion's Watch Tower 1896 Mar 1 pp.47,48 "However much we might endeavor to apply this figure to the Lord's people collectively, the fact would still remain that the various items stated would not fit to a company of individuals. For instance, in the 42nd verse, in the common version it is

rendered, that faithful steward; the revised version, the faithful steward; as though a particular one were meant and the term not used indefinitely for a number. Turning to the Greek text we find that the emphasis is there also and in double form--the faithful, the wise steward. ...at the time of the parable's fulfillment the Lord would appoint a servant in the household to bring these matters to the attention of all the servants, and that certain responsibilities would rest upon such a one respecting the dispatch of his duties… " Zion's Watch Tower 1904 Apr 15 p.125 "Thousands of the readers of Pastor Russell's writings believe that he filled the office of "that faithful and wise servant," and that his great work was giving to the Household of Faith meat in due season. His modesty and humility precluded him from openly claiming this title, but he admitted as much in private conversation." Watch Tower 1916 Dec 1 p.356 Russell continued to be considered the Faithful Slave after his death in 1916. "THE WATCH TOWER unhesitatingly proclaims Brother Russell as "that faithful and wise servant." He delivered the message faithfully, finished his course and has now entered into his reward. Through him the Lord gave to the church the message that is so essential to each one who in this harvest time would win the glorious prize." Watch Tower 1917 Mar 1 p.67 "We believe that all who are now rejoicing in present truth will concede that Brother Russell faithfully filled the office of special servant of tile Lord; and that he was made ruler over all the Lord‘s goods." Watch Tower 1923 Mar 1 p.68 With Russell's death, a new interpretation became necessary. In the 1917 leaflet The Parable of the Penny, Rutherford was described as the Steward, replacing Russell. "Saith unto His steward. — Brother J. F. Rutherford, President and Manager of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society after the Pastor‘s death, and elected to that office in harmony with the Pastor‘s will." p.2 In 1926, Rutherford reinterpreted the Faithful Slave from a single person to a group of people. Thus the interpretation had come full circle, but this time the servant included Jesus as well as the 144,000. "Seeing then that The Servant of Jehovah is The Christ, and that The Christ is composed of Jesus and the faithful members of his body, we find it proper to apply the term "Servant" to Jesus Christ alone or to Jesus Christ and the members of his body collectively as one; and sometimes it is applied only to the members of the body of

Christ yet on earth." Watchtower 1927 Feb 15 p.53 Over time, Jesus was removed from the role of faithful servant, so once more it was just the little flock. Refinements to this interpretation resulted in a convoluted doctrine, with this single Slave described as a class of people that feed the same class of people! For many decades it was taught that the slave and the domestics were both the same group of people. The 144,000 anointed ones were the slave as a whole, yet individually the same 144,000 were the domestics that as a group they rule over. The faithful and discreet slave became the 144,000 collectively. The domestics became the 144,000 individually. The 144,000 fed the 144,000. The rest of Jehovah's Witnesses and worldly people were not directly mentioned in this parable. This was explained in the following article. "If all the anointed as a group, no matter where on earth they live, are members of the slave class, who are the "domestics"? They are the same anointed ones but considered from a different viewpoint-as individuals. Yes, as individuals they would be of the "slave" or they would be "domestics," depending on whether they were dispensing spiritual food or partaking of it. To illustrate: As recorded at 2 Peter 3:15, 16, the apostle Peter makes reference to Paul's letters. When reading them, Peter would be as one of the domestics feeding on the spiritual food provided by Paul as a representative of the slave class." Watchtower 1995 May 15 p.16 Not only was this bizarre concept unnecessarily confusing, in reality the Watchtower Society does not operate this way. The majority of the 144,000 do not feed the sheep, in that they are not involved in establishing Watchtower doctrines, rules or procedures of the organization. The Governing Body alone has say in what is fed to the sheep. Few of the Anointed Witnesses I have known have written any Watchtower articles or developed any doctrine or procedure. In recent times, most articles are written by members of the Other Sheep and simply authorised by the Governing Body. "4. Those used as writers must be dedicated, baptized brothers or sisters in good standing with their local congregations and who have writing ability. They should be exemplary, modest, not inclined to talk loosely to others about their writing activity. ... 5. PREPARING MATERIAL: The subjects on which articles may be written are quite varied. Some articles will deal with spiritual matters, and these should be written by brothers." Branch Organization Manual p.24-1 Para. 4 Since its formation, the Governing Body has varied in size between seven and and eighteen anointed men. When the Watchtower says to follow the "faithful and discreet slave" the majority of Jehovah's Witnesses understood this to mean following the rules

of the Governing Body, as only these members direct the Organization. From around 2009, the Watchtower openly admitted the Governing Body leaders represented the Slave, and began downplaying the importance of the rest of the Anointed. For instance, review the following quotes from the Watchtower 2009 June 15: "However, Christians who have truly received this anointing do not demand special attention. They do not believe that their being of the anointed gives them special insights beyond what even some experienced members of the "great crowd" may have." p.23 "Today, the Governing Body represents the faithful and discreet slave class." Image p.23 "Similarly, today a limited number of anointed men have the responsibility of representing the slave class. They make up the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses." p.24 This same sentiment was expressed in 2010. "Would all anointed Christians ―shine‖? In a sense, yes, for all Christians would participate in preaching, in disciple making, and in building one another up at meetings. Anointed ones would set the example. (Zech. 8:23) In addition to this, however, deep things were to be revealed during the time of the end. The very prophecy Daniel recorded was ―sealed up‖ until that time. (Dan. 12:9) How and through whom would the spirit search into these deep things? When the time comes to clarify a spiritual matter in our day, holy spirit helps responsible representatives of ―the faithful and discreet slave‖ at world headquarters to discern deep truths that were not previously understood. (Matt. 24:45; 1 Cor. 2:13) The Governing Body as a whole considers adjusted explanations. (Acts 15:6) What they learn, they publish for the benefit of all." Watchtower 2010 Jul 15 pp.22,23 Whilst it was stated that the Governing Body direct the rest of the Anointed, it was not explained where this left the rest of the Anointed, or how they were used as part of the Slave. "As Head of the Christian congregation, Christ has used this ―faithful and discreet slave‖ to administer His Kingdom interests on earth. He has provided direction for the anointed ―domestics‖ and their ―other sheep‖ companions by means of a Governing Body." Examining the Scriptures Jul 15

In 2011, it was claimed it is not even necessary to know who the Anointed are. "A number of factors — including past religious beliefs or even mental or emotional imbalance — might cause some to assume mistakenly that they have the heavenly calling. We thus have no way of knowing the exact number of anointed ones on earth; nor do we need to know." Watchtower 2011 Aug 15 p.22 The concept that all Anointed are of the Slave fell apart with these indications that as a whole the Anointed are not of importance. It had become clear that only the Governing Body have any influence in "feeding the sheep" and running the organisation, and regard themselves alone as representing the Slave. This became official at the 2012 Annual Meeting. "The evidence points to the following conclusion: ―The faithful and discreet slave‖ was appointed over Jesus‘ domestics in 1919. That slave is the small, composite group of anointed brothers serving at world headquarters during Christ‘s presence who are directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food. When this group work together as the Governing Body, they act as ―the faithful and discreet slave.‖" jw.org 10th Nov 2012 How is 1919 Derived? A lot of emphasis is placed on 1919, so how solid is the doctrine supporting this year? The explanation is that Jesus started ruling in heaven in October 1914. Three and a half years later, in June 1918, he came to inspect his earthly organisation. This is based on Revelation 11:2,3, regarding the temple being trampled for 42 months or 1260 days (3 1/2 years). June 1918 corresponds to the period Rutherford and the rest of the Watchtower board of directors were put in jail. 9 months later, in March 1919, the Watchtower board of directors were released. The 9 month period is based on the 3 1/2 days of Revelation 11:9. This corresponds with Jesus appointing the Watchtower Governing Body as his slave. Each step is a failure in logic. The year 1914 is based on a shaky foundation. Jesus rulership is said to have commenced in October, but the 42 months are said to have started in December, with no explanation of the 2 month gap. The 42 months of Revelation 11 is said to be a literal 42 months, but the 3 1/2 days from the same passage in Revelation 11 is said to be figurative of 9 months. (3 1/2

years = 3 1/2 years … 3 1/2 days = 9 months The release of Rutherford from jail was irrelevant to most people, and hardly can be said that the result was "great fear fell upon those beholding them." There was no Governing Body in 1919. At the time, Watchtower doctrine was authorised solely by one man, the Watchtower President; Rutherford. The table is taken from the Ministerial Training School notes, as conducted during the mid 2000's. It graphically outlines the Watchtower's reasoning above, as well as highlight the discrepency by a multiple of 75 in the time frame of the 3.5 days and 1,260 days. It should be a matter of grave concern for a Jehovah's Witness that the underlying doctrine for the year so key to their leadership's authoritarin claims is based on such baseless Scriptural manipulation. Consequences The Watchtower claims the Slave has been given all authority. "The facts of modern history show that in the year 1919 [Jesus] revived these much afflicted disciples and gathered them together in a united body. Then he appointed them as his ―slave‖ class ―over all his belongings,‖ that is, over all his royal interests at the earth." Watchtower 1971 Dec 15 p.750 This is not what was intended by the Scriptures. The Bible states that the appointment over all the belongings is made after the master arrives. Matthew 24:46,47 "Happy is that slave if his master on arriving (erchomai) finds him doing so. Truly I say to you, He will appoint him over all his belongings." The master has not yet arrived, as the memorial is to cease on his arrival, and so the Slave has not been appointed over all the belongings. 1 Corinthians 11:26 "For as often as you eat this loaf and drink this cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he arrives (erchomai)." The leaders have prematurely seized control for themselves, and consolidated that control. The 2012 version of the doctrine leaves Christians uncared for between 33 CE and 1919 CE, and elevates the exclusivity and importance of Governing Body. This is in contrast to the parable, which indicates that at this time the elders are to be shepherds of the congregation.

One would expect that the definition for one of Jehovah's Witnesses to be a person that worships Jehovah. However, the defining concept to being a Jehovah's Witness is not worship of Jehovah, but rather following the "faithful and discreet slave." In a judicial committee, the foremost question is not whether a Witness believes the Bible or worships Jehovah, but whether they believe God is using the Watchtower Faithful and Discreet Slave in our day. If a person believes in the Bible and Jehovah, they will still be disfellowshipped as an apostate if they openly confess that the Watchtower leaders do not represent Jehovah's slave. The Governing Body has managed to deflect attention from Jesus by means of their doctrine that Jesus is mediator for the Slave class alone, and that salvation can only be achieved through association with the Slave. "He is the Mediator between his heavenly Father, Jehovah God, and the nation of spiritual Israel, which is limited to only 144,000 members. " Worldwide Security Under the "Prince of Peace" (1986) pp.10-11 "Jesus knew that he was going to purchase these anointed ones with his own blood, so he fittingly referred to them collectively as his slave." Watchtower 1993 May 1 p.16

"To keep in relationship with "our Savior, God," the "great crowd" needs to remain united with the remnant of spiritual Israelites." Watchtower 1979 Nov 15 p.27 Benefiting from "One Mediator Between God and Men" Rather than draw people to Jesus, the Governing Body misapply the parable of the Faithful and Discreet Slave to direct attention to themselves, inserting their authority between Jesus and his followers.

The Watchtower 2013 Apr 15 presents an image depicting the hierarchy of their Organisation Chart. This no longer references the Anointed, nor separates the Governing Body from the Faithful Slave, but extends from Jehovah directly to the Governing Body, Branch Committees, Travelling Overseers, Elders, Congregations and finally Publishers. The image draws on the Celestial Chariot of Ezekiel 1 as a basis for the heavenly part of the Organisation. Unusually for a Christian religion, they have chosen this representation, which does not include Jesus at all, but has the Governing Body directly beneath Jehovah. There is certainly no reason why they could not have

used Daniel 7 which the same Watchtower also references, which has Jehovah's Throne on wheels, along with the Son of Man. The Governing Body use the Slave concept to say that without them the Bible is beyond understanding. "However, we cannot hope to acquire a good relationship with Jehovah if we ignore those whom Jesus has appointed to care for his belongings. Without the assistance of ―the faithful and discreet slave,‖ we would neither understand the full import of what we read in God‘s Word nor know how to apply it." Examining the Scriptures Daily 2012 Mar 4 "All who want to understand the Bible should appreciate that the "greatly diversified wisdom of God" can become known only through Jehovah's channel of communication, the faithful and discreet slave" Watchtower 1994 Oct 1 p.8 "We have the opportunity to show love for our brothers who take the lead in the congregation or in connection with Jehovah's visible organization worldwide. This includes being loyal to "the faithful and discreet slave." (Matthew 24:45-47) Let us face the fact that no matter how much Bible reading we have done, we would never have learned the truth on our own. We would not have discovered the truth regarding Jehovah, his purposes and attributes, the meaning and importance of his name, the Kingdom, Jesus' ransom, the difference between God's organization and Satan's, nor why God has permitted wickedness." Watchtower 1990 Dec 1 p.19 "Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible. For this reason the Bible cannot be properly understood without Jehovah's visible organization in mind." Watchtower 1967 Oct 1 p.587 The Bible has been provided for us to know God's requirements. Has the Watchtower enlightened people beyond the words of Jesus? Is it not more accurate to say that what the Watchtower has said beyond that contained in the Bible has regularly been wrong and later changed? Information such as: Failed time prophecies Strange medical information and dangerous decrees such as that vaccinations and transplants are unchristian The changing stance on blood

By going beyond the guidelines given in the Scriptures on disfellowshipping, have not the Slave created a practice that has had a destructive effect on the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, dividing families for decades? When a group of men claim special guidance from God as his sole representatives, they risk controlling people without justification, leading to disastrous results for the followers. Christians do well to keep in mind Bible warnings about following humans, and remember who their head really is. "Do not put YOUR trust in nobles, Nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs." Psalms 146:3 "But I want YOU to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God." 1 Corinthians 11:3 Does the organization has ever taken part in prayers with other religions and concentrations? Watchtower's United Nations Association In 1992, the Watchtower became an Associate NGO with the United Nations. This was despite spending decades condemning the UN as the scarlet coloured wild beast of Revelation. As a result, many Jehovah's Witnesses severed ties with the Watchtower for what they consider a hypocritical and dishonest chapter of the religion's history. Jehovah's Witnesses link to UN queried Sect accused of hypocrisy over association with organisation it has demonised. "The United Nations is being asked to investigate why it has granted associate status to the Jehovah's Witnesses, the fundamentalist US-based Christian sect, which regards it as the scarlet beast predicted in the Book of Revelation. Disaffected members of the 6m-strong group, which has 130,000 followers in the UK, have accused the Witnesses' elderly governing body of hypocrisy in secretly accepting links with an organisation that they continue to denounce in apocalyptic terms. The UN itself admitted yesterday that it was surprised that the sect, whose formal name is the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, had been accepted on its list of non-governmental organisations for the last 10 years."

4) Question: Does the Bible prohibits Holy Temples and in what verse? Does it allowed,on the contrary the ''Kingdom Halls'' with 4 naked walls? Does it prohibits the name'' father'' to the priest, but it speaks for ''governing body'', which will Does it have ultimate authority to define who will partake to the Holly Communion, WHO will burn at Armageddon, WHO WILL BE IN PARADISE (ON EARTH according to the ''Watchtower'') AND WHO WILL GO TO 144,000 (in HEAVEN)?

The ''Governing Body'' which apostolic succession it has? Governing Body The Watchtower claims to structure its leadership hierarchy after a model set by a first century, Christian governing body. However, the term "governing body" does not appear in the New Testament. Neither does the concept of a small, centralised group of leaders.

Governing Body 2007 First Century Governing Body? Jehovah's Witnesses are strongly controlled by a central leadership, known as the Governing Body. They are said to be appointed by holy spirit, and pass on instructions from Jehovah and Jesus. "However, the Governing Body are appointed through the holy spirit under the direction of Jehovah God and Jesus Christ." Watchtower 1990 Mar 15 p.18 "These overseers faithfully seek to apply instructions received from Jehovah God and Jesus Christ by means of the faithful and discreet slave and its Governing Body." Watchtower 1990 Mar 15 p.20 "Christ thus leads the congregation by means of the spirit-anointed "faithful and discreet slave" and its Governing Body." Examining the Scriptures Daily 2007 p.34

The Watchtower claims that a formal governing body was established in the first century, which is used as the basis for how the Governing Body of the Watchtower Society operate today. "While all anointed Christians collectively form God's household, there is abundant evidence that Christ chose a small number of men out of the slave class to serve as a visible governing body. The early history of the congregation shows that the 12 apostles, including Matthias, were the foundation of the first-century governing body." Watchtower 1990 Mar 15 p.11 The term "governing body" is 'loaded language' as it never appears in the Scriptures and so has unique application within the pages of the Watchtower. How does the Watchtower justify a Governing Body when the term does not exist in the Bible? This is by reference to the issue of circumcision as discussed in Acts chapter 15. This is the sole Bible example of brothers convening to establish doctrine. On this occasion, it cannot be said that the decision was made by an established governing body. Acts 15:2 says: "… they arranged for Paul and Barnabas and some others of them to go up to the apostles and older men in Jerusalem regarding this dispute." Rather than showing the existence of a small number of 12 leaders being referred to as a governing body, Acts describes a large gathering. This was comprised of the apostles, older men (elders), Paul and Barnabas, who were travelling missionaries, and others. This large group combined to decide on an important issue affecting the local congregations. The history of the Apostle Paul also shows that there was no centralized governing body directing the early Christians. After Paul's conversion, he did not convene with a governing body or go to Jerusalem to receive an assignment. Rather, he immediately embarked on his missionary work under direction of the Holy Spirit. Paul did not make his first trip to Jerusalem until three years after his conversion, and even then he did not meet with a group of leaders, but just with Peter and James. Galatians 1:17-19 "Neither did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles previous to me, but I went off into Arabia, and I came back again to Damascus. Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and I stayed with him for fifteen days. But I saw no one else of the apostles, only James the brother of the Lord." Paul then did not go back to Jerusalem for another fourteen years (Galations 2:1-3),

possibly for the occasion described in Acts 15. Schaff's History of the Christian Church shows that after the issue of circumcision was resolved, "we have no trace of Councils before the middle of the second century." Historical Development Since incorporation in 1884, the Watchtower Society was led by a President and board of directors. The first three Presidents, Russell, followed by Rutherford and Knorr, had complete control over doctrine. It was not until 1976 that this power was shifted from a single individual to a group, referred to as the Governing Body. The term governing body was not applied to the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society until the Watchtower 1943 July 15 p.216, which described it as a "legal governing body". In the Watchtower 1944 November 1 p.328, it was discussed that "a visible governing body under Jehovah God and his Christ" be involved in the election of elders and the 1955 Qualified to be Ministers p.381 applied this term to "the board of directors of this corporation." Although this governing body had legal and operational powers, matters of doctrine remained at the discretion of the President.

Board of Directors, referred to as a governing body between 1944 and 1971. Left to right - Lyman Swingle, Thomas J. Sullivan, Grant Suiter, Hugo Reimer, Nathan H. Knorr (President), Fred W. Franz (Vice-President) and Milton G. Henschel. Until 1971, the term governing body was spelt with a small g and b, as a description of the operational function the board played. In the Watchtower 1971 December 15, the term was capitalised as the "Governing Body of Jehovah's witnesses", and explained to be the group leading the religion, separate from the board of directors, although the membership of the board of directors was comprised only of Governing Body members until 2000. Their power was still limited until January 1st 1976, when authority was shifted from the President to operating committees comprised of Governing Body members. To see the distinction between the capitalisation of Governing Body, see the Watchtower 2001 January 15 pp.28-29. This shows the formal introduction of the word as a proper noun when applied to the Watchtower leaders in 1971, as opposed to a governing body in the first century and when applied to the Watchtower board of directors.

When introducing the new concept of a Governing Body that represents the Faithful and Discreet Slave, the Watchtower 1971 made the claim that "a governing body made its appearance" after the 1884 formation of Zion's Watch Tower Society (December 15 p.761). This backdating attempted to include Russell and the early leaders as part of the governing body. Attempting to include the early leaders and board of directors as the governing body creates the discrepancy that Hayden Covington, who was not one of the anointed and was a Director and Vice President between 1939 and 1945, must be considered one of the governing body, despite this only being open to the anointed. (See Watchtower 2001 Jan 15 p.28.) The Watchtower shows dishonesty by presenting a revisionist history when it indicates that there was a Governing Body since 1944, by capitalising the letters GB, even though the term was not capitalised until 1971 and the "theocratic" leadership was not shifted from the President to the Governing Body until 1976. An example of this appeared in 2012. "After his evening discourse in a school, Hugo Riemer, who later became a member of the Governing Body, answered Bible questions until past midnight." Watchtower 2012 Aug 15 p.31 Hugo Riemer was not a member of the Governing Body, but rather the governing body, from 1943 until his death in 1965, whereas the Governing Body was not established until 1971, six years after Riemer's death. Watchtower Leaders A 1971 illustration from the Watchtower positions the Governing Body as representatives of the Faithful and Discreet Slave, which included all of the Anointed. This was never in effect the case, as only the Governing Body ever had any final say over procedure and doctrine. In the Annual Meeting of 2012, the Governing Body finally openly proclaimed that they alone had this power vested in them, and alone hold position as the Slave. The Governing Body rules by fiat; that is, they have absolute authority. It is said that the Watchtower Governing Body must be submitted to because Jesus actively directs them.

"Naturally, all elders must submit to Christ's "right hand" of control, guidance, and direction, which he exercises by means of the spirit and the spirit-begotten members of the Governing Body." Watchtower 1987 Aug 1 p.19 As shown in the chapter on the Mediator, the Governing Body assumes the role of spiritual mediators for the Great Crowd. Recognizing the insertion of an intermediary organization in place of Jesus is important, as it is a common practice by groups using coercive persuasion. In Robert J. Lifton's The Future of Immortality and Other Essays for a Nuclear Age (New York, Basic Books, 1987) he writes; "Mystical manipulation can take on a special quality in these cults because the leaders become mediators for God." The claim that there is just one true Organization and that Jehovah uses the Governing Body of the Watchtower Society to direct his followers gives these leaders great power. It becomes justification for why a Jehovah's Witnesses must unquestioningly obey edict written in the Watchtower as if it is "the voice of God" (Watchtower 1957 June 15 p.370). It allows the Governing Body to disfellowship as apostates anyone that does not agree with all their doctrine, regardless of the ongoing changes that are being made. It allows them to add to the reasons that the Bible specifically lists as worthy of shunning. It has also permitted the Governing Body to create rules covering all areas of worship; such as, how many meetings to attend, how to preach, what to wear, what to say, how often to go and how to report, criteria that have become viewed as important for salvation. Power is known to corrupt, and leaders tend to relish the power they have over their followers. Paul offers sage advice: 1 Corinthians 7:23 "You were bought with a price; stop becoming slaves of men." The Governing Body attempt to draw a parallel between themselves and the structure of Christianity in first century, drawing upon Acts chapter 15. However it is simply not the case that this Scripture can be used to imply there was a small, set group of leaders, referred to as governing body.

Does it says in ''Watchtower'' that the ''Witnesses''will wash their feet on the blood of non-witnesses? Is THIS the organization of love? Apart from the comical side of the question, we think it's time to ask ourselves, how

can the "Watchtower" on the one hand to claim that represent God.Who is a God of love and forgiveness, and on the other wants to extinction indeed a tragic and painful rivals? Do you distinguish yourself all the love that the Lord had when He forgiven even his enemies - and became the hallmark of Christianity?-Once the crucified, in phrases such as: "those who stand obstacle to Basel ie. preachers of Jehovah's Witnesses will torned to pieces! " Or at the end of the war of Armageddon, the survivors Witnesses "rocks and ruins should make look beautiful to them!", with the word ''beautiful'' is written in bold! You can find these horrific "pearls" in the Watchtower Society publications. Full of such "masterpieces" in which trained daily by J W's are all its versions. So while the first quote is from the standpoint of March 1, 1965, page 148 and the second by Watchtower of September 15, 1973, page 555.We,to the above "masterpieces" cannot differentiate Christian love . But we saw a kind of sadism that rejoice and revel in the destruction and misery of the other.And the sadism reaches to climax, in the Watchtower of February 1, 1968, page 83. There is a text entitled "None of his enemies will not escape" and deals with what will happen at Armageddon...

A text that is really horrible when we can not believe our eyes! In this, the Company not only calls us abominable enemies, we do not must have a decent burial, but continuing this frenzy of horror maintains that our blood to be spilled in the war of Armageddon, other than the Great Jehovah will wash therein their feet! and others like thirsty vampires will suck! And the most beautiful of the matter is that, according to the company, all this will be with God's approval! February 1, 1968 Watchtower, page 83: The J W's will wash their feet in our blood and they''ll suck it! In the book of the Society "You can live" on pages 16 and 17, we read that human governments belong to the Devil, where there are the corresponding references in the Bible to support his writings:

"You can live", page 17: The human governments belong to the Devil! In another form of the Company, which of course is none other than the official journal of the Organization of J W's, Watchtower, namely 1 September 1998 page 16, states that - according to the Bible again - the human governments belong to God, Who and put them in the world!

Watchtower September 1, 1998, page 16: the human governments belongs to God! Possible after all of them,how can a poor supporter of the organization feel that the ''Organization got the true''? JESUS WILL KILL THOSE WHO ARE NOT WITNESSES OF JEHOVAH! For the end of this chapter actually left a shocking document. Derived from the "Watchtower" of March 1, 1997, page 9, and shows how the Organization and the Witnessess of Jehowah sees Christ. It is a picture that shows Jesus naked on horseback with his sword marching down screaming! and behind Him follows similarly screaming with their bare swords the holy angels, ready to slay(!) all of us who do not belong to the Organization of the "Watchtower". Observe what is unprecedented and terrible hatred that reaches the limits of rabies is imprinted in the persons of Christ and the holy angels and wonder: So is the God of LOVE, who to save His creature, became the most shameful death, the death of the Cross? Did God said that people in the future will be divided into two categories? a) one on earth (in ''the paradise of the Watchtower'') and b) the ''chosen ones'' that they will be (only) 144,000-in heaven? Do you know how many Israelites are Christian Orthodox today?'s About 140,000, which means that we are in the end of all times, just like the Bible is interpreted, not as interpreted by the sect.

5) Do Orthodox Christians commit idolatry? After you blame the orthodox Christians as idolaters for the honour on the Holy Icons, How does your magazines'' viewpoint'' Jesus Christ appears on the covers and inside? Appears not in neat beard, kalokouremenos as if it has come from the kommotirio.Pou know that it was so the figure of Christ? see for no apostolic succession, the Sacred tradition that may have midnight black? (Even with the advent of Jesus Christ, which is

not the most important thing), but things are redemptive and dogmatically that your escape, having no connection with the ancient Church. Your only issue is the fact that we share the picture?'' Crossing'' on the original, you have not heard? Getting that you embrace your father, your mother, your child, and generally, someone who is apochorizeste leaving for a trip? can convert (from love, honor) The photo of your dead, but not the picture of Christ and the apostles who read their writings?

The Bible, both the Old and the New Testament is full of worship, honorary. Did you know that the Jewish Talmud Christians accused (as well as some Jewish sects) as idolaters? There is even a whole chapter given in the Talmud, called'' Abodah Zarah''. Which means Enthusiasts Idol - pagans, so we appreciate that originate from sources of heresy. And the adoption of the rule in Jewish writing, with the 39 books of the Old Testament Masoretic ie, instead of the Christian rule of the Scriptures, who is the oldest and translated from the Septuagint, and are complete with the 49-something books not convenient for the company and demonstrates the prophecies about the expected Messiah, concerning the existence of the soul, and divinity of Christ. Many are the accusations that Satan has accumulated with the passing centuries against the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ. By taking advantage of certain people‘s ignorance on the matter, he convinced them that certain objects -normally venerated by the Church- are idols, and therefore all those who likewise venerate them, are idolaters. We intend to reveal here the lameness of this viewpoint, along with the arguments that latter-day iconoclasts resort to.

When is an icon considered an idol? It is true, that there are numerous passages –especially in the Old Testament, but also in the New- that condemn the worship, even the manufacture of idols. We shall therefore examine certain characteristic Scriptural passages, in order to comprehend the true meaning of this prohibition, and the significance of the words ―idol‖ and ―image‖.

One specific passage that is persistently maltreated by modern iconoclasts, is Isaiah 40 : 18-20, where it says the following: : ―With what, therefore, shall you equate God? Or what likeness shall you adapt Him to? The craftsman forges a sculpted image, and the goldsmith spreads gold over it, and forges silver chains. The poor, when making an offering, selects the finest quality wood, and finds for himself an able craftsman, in order to make a sculpted image that does not stir.‖ In this passage, we observe the following: The word ―likeness‖ is used in the same sense as the word ―image‖. However, we must underline here, that the above lines are opposed to the making of likenesses of God, and not likenesses of creatures. Acting in full harmony with these passages, the Orthodox Church forbids the manufacture of any likeness whatsoever of God. For this reason, Orthodox icons are only those that depict the saints and our Lord Jesus Christ, in His human nature. Icons that supposedly depict God are considered idols by the Church. This is the spirit that permeates all of the passages of the Holy Bible that condemn the idols. The manufacture and the veneration of images of creation are not condemned, unless those images are intended to depict the uncreated and invisible God, and are subsequently venerated as God. Only then, are they considered to be idols. Let‘s take a look at a few more passages: Isaiah 44 : 9-20: ―Those who manufacture idols, do so in vain…. Who made God?…….. He chops down a cedar tree… and takes it and warms himself. Even more, he burns it and bakes bread. Then he also makes it into a god, and worships it. He makes it into an idol, and kneels before it…… And the leftovers of it, he makes into a god, into a sculpture of Him. He kneels before it, and worships it, and prays to it, and says: ‗Redeem me, for you are my god‘‖. Here again, reference is made to the depiction of a god, and not the images of saints, as in all the related passages of the Holy Bible. Romans, 1 : 23, 25: ―And they altered the glory of the imperishable God, into the likeness of a perishable man‘s image, and that of fowl, and of quadruped beasts and of reptiles….. and they (thus) revered and worshipped creation rather than the Creator..‖ No-one can accuse the Orthodox Church that it worships the saints as though they are

gods. Saints are not worshipped; they are merely honored as select people of God. Consequently, these passages apply only to those who manufacture images of God and worship them accordingly. Since, therefore, an idol is only a depiction of God, it is an outright lie and an unfair accusation that the Church apparently worships idols; furthermore, the accusers will eventually have to account for the mistrust that they have shown towards God‘s Church. The 10 Commandments and the portrayal of the saints Let‘s take a look at another maltreated passage, which is used by those opposed to icons. It is in Exodus, 20: 4 and it is one of the ten Commandments: ―Thou shalt not make unto thyself any image, nor any likeness, of anything that is in the sky above, or in the earth below, or in the waters below the earth. Do not prostrate yourself before them, nor worship them, for I, the lord your God, am a zealous God…‖ The deniers of icons say: ―Here is a passage that forbids the depiction, even of creatures!‖ Our reply to this, is as follows: ―Even this passage refers to the depiction of creatures as gods; and we can verify this, in Deuteronomy, 4: 12-19 : ―And (although) the Lord spoke unto you…. yet you did not see any likeness (of Him). You only heard a voice. And he revealed to you … the ten commandments…. So, guard well your souls, (for you have seen no likeness on the day that the Lord spoke to you in Horeb, amidst the flames), lest you corrupt yourselves, and make unto yourselves any idol, an image of any form: of a male or female likeness…. or of beast, … or of vulture,….. or reptilian,…. or fish-like..… lest you lift up your eyes to the sky, and, upon seeing the sun and the moon and the stars and all the components of the firmament, and thus stray, and prostrate yourself and worship them‖. Here we see very analytically what was forbidden for depiction ―as likenesses of God‖. Once again, this is proof that there is no prohibition for the depiction of saints; only of God. Here we also see that the reason it was forbidden to depict God, was ―because there was no likeness of Him‖ . Now, it is our turn to ask: How is it, that inside the temple of Solomon there were likenesses of oxen? How is it, that above the Ark of the Covenant there were

likenesses of angels? How is it, that there were likenesses of angels inside the inner sanctum of the Tabernacle? (Exodus, 25:18 and 36:35, and Chronicles II, 4:3-4) Can we therefore assume that only the likenesses of saints bother contemporary iconoclasts? The portrayal of Jesus Christ Let‘s look at something else now: Today, after so many years, do we Christians -who are no longer under Mosaic Law- have the right to depict God? As we noted previously, at the time the ten commandments were given, God had given no likeness of Himself. However, when the time had come, God revealed His image to us, in the person of Jesus Christ, as noted in Colossians, 1:15: ―…who is the image of the invisible God; the firstborn before all creation‖.

Also, in John, 14:9, Jesus Christ says:

―…whomsoever has seen me, has seen the Father‖. Therefore, today, we can see (and therefore also depict) God, in the person of Jesus Christ; we do not depict God in His divine nature, but only in His human nature, since we have never seen His Divinity.

Portrayals of God The only other instances that the divinely-inspired Church of the Lord allows us to depict God, is in the icon of ―Abraham‘s Hospitality‖, where the three angelic messengers are portrayed, not as an image of God, but as a symbolism of the Holy Trinity; also, in the icon of Christ‘s baptism, where the Holy Spirit descends from heaven in the form of a dove. And of course, this does not imply here that the Holy Spirit has the actual form of a bird; the Holy Spirit simply took on that form at the time. In both of these icons, we depict only that which we -as humans- can perceive; We have no intention of portraying the invisible and indescribable nature of God. At this point, the reader will most probably wonder why there is a (so-called) ―icon of the Holy Trinity‖ in Orthodox Churches. We must unfortunately agree with him, inasmuch as this icon should not exist, and that its origin is Papist. The 7th Ecumenical Council (Synod) forbade it, subsequently, those in charge of the churches that allow this icon, bear a huge responsibility, because they become the cause of idolatry (Acts

of the 7th Ecum.Synod). This however does not mean that the entire body of the Church is to blame; only those specific people who are held accountable for those churches, who show no respect, or, through negligence, are ignorant of the basics of the faith. Those who venerate this icon are also to blame, for not bothering to learn the details of their faith, and while they are under the impression that they are acting in an Orthodox way, they are in fact acting like Papists. This specific icon, apart from its being an idol, is also heretic in its portrayal of the persons of the Holy Trinity, in many ways that deviate from the subject of our study. (―Forbidden portrayals‖, George E. Gavriil).

The honoring of a person Another issue that the Church is accused of, is that we apparently honor a piece of wood! This is totally false!! What is being honored in reality, is the portrayed person and not the wood, just as in a photograph of an acquaintance, we do not show respect to the paper, but to the person depicted on it. ―But then, how come some icons are miraculous and others aren‘t?‖ one might ask. This is a case where the wooden material of the icon plays no role; only the will of God. He alone knows for what purpose He chooses a specific icon. It might be, for the sake of the piety of the artist who painted it; it might be, for the sake of the specific location that the icon rests in; it might be for numerous other reasons, which only He knows. Besides, if we refer to the Holy Bible, not all the pools of Israel were miraculous, like the pool of Bethesda! (John, 5:2-4) So, how do we know what the features of the saints were like, after so many centuries? Every generation of Christians ensured the preservation of their contemporary saints‘ features. But even in cases where their image was not preserved, we give them an appearance that resembles Jesus Christ‘s image, inasmuch as they were virtually images of Christ. The importance lies in the saint, and not in his accurate portrayal. This is the reason we observe differing representations of certain saints. Not to mention, that saints no longer look like they did, when they lived on earth! It is for this reason that the Byzantine, rich-in-symbolisms iconography is preferred, where the characteristics of the person portrayed do not attempt to faithfully portray

the exact likeness of the saint‘s features; only to symbolically depict certain of the saint‘s characteristics. Shadows, images and ―things‖ Last of all, we shall examine a certain difference between the Old and the New Testaments, which pertains to our subject: In the Epistle to Hebrews, 10 :1, the Holy Bible mentions the following: ―The Law is but the shadow of the riches to come; it is not the (actual) image of things…‖ According to these words, we can see that the Old Testament (=Law) was only the shadow, while the New Testament is THE (=THE PRESENT) image of the things to come. The Old Testament spoke enigmatically of God, in a shadowy way, and was therefore unable to utilize images. The New Testament however showed us the image of exactly those celestial things, in other words, a clearer aspect of them. Now that we have truly seen the image of God in Jesus Christ, and those who were sanctified in Christ‘s image, we can depict them, until the moment comes when we shall meet them face to face; when we find ourselves within those things to come. Is veneration worship? It is customary for Protestants to accuse Orthodox Christians of supposedly ‗worshipping‘ icons, or saints. However, this is an unfair accusation, which has its roots in people‘s ignorance on the subject. In this study, we will demonstrate the true meaning of ―veneration‖ and ―worship‖.

―Worship‖ is one thing, ―Veneration‖ is another We need to distinguish between these two different words, from the very beginning. ―Veneration‖ does not always imply ―Worship‖! It could imply worship, but it could also refer to an honorific bow. When a hotel porter bows to a guest, surely he isn‘t actually worshipping the guest! He is merely honoring him, with a respectful bow. In the case of God, however, this respectful bow is also a gesture of worship.

When a Christian bows before one of God‘s (sanctified) people, he is not worshipping that person; he is merely honoring that person as a person of God. In the same way, when he bows before the icon of a Saint, he is not worshipping the icon; he is paying homage to the person portrayed on it. But : if the icon portrays the Lord Jesus Christ, then only is the portrayed person worshipped; not the image, but the actual person that it portrays.

What kind of veneration is forbidden by the Holy Bible? Let‘s take a look at a few passages of the Holy Bible that are used by contemporary iconoclasts, in their attempt to convince us that veneration is the same as worship. They make reference to the incident in Acts, 14:11-15, where the crowds attempted to offer sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas (because they thought those two were the gods Jupiter and Mercury), but the two Christians outrightly refused. In this instance, the sacrifice that was going to be offered was in the context of worship, as the people had mistaken them for gods. This was not a case of honorific veneration, hence it was only natural that they would refuse a gesture befitting God only. In Exodus 20 : 4,5, in one of the 10 commandments, it refers clearly to likenesses of anything found in the skies, or the earth, or the sea: ―you shall not prostrate yourself before them, nor worship them.‖ Here, we have the following comment to make: To begin with, (even though the 10 commandments were still in force), this passage again implies a prostration of worship, and not just an honorific veneration. This can be seen in Deuteronomy 4: 12-19. It is very clear, that it refers to a likeness of god, and not of creations. It is therefore speaking of a prostration of worship, which is what is forbidden. Honorific veneration is not forbidden. It speaks in exactly the same way, wherever prostration of worship is addressed to a likeness of gods. (for example Isaiah 4: 9-20) The phrase ―you shall not prostrate yourself before them, nor worship them‖ is a Hebraism; a characteristic, Hebrew form of speech, where the same thing is repeated, using different words which have a slightly different significance. Here, the word ―prostration‖ is used along with the word ―worship‖, consequently implying a

prostration of worship. Another, similar Hebraism is found in the familiar words of the Lord‘s mother, when she prophesied together with Elizabeth in Luke, 1: 46,47: ―My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced, in God my savior‖. We also notice the same thing in Hebrews, 13:5: ―I shall not leave you, nor shall I desert you‖. The examples are many more. The passages therefore that we examined, do not prohibit any kind of veneration; only the veneration/prostration that accompanies worship. They forbid prostration of worship.

Which veneration of creatures is forbidden? ―Well, why did the angel refuse John‘s veneration/prostration in Revelations 19:10‖?, one might ask. Well, to begin with, we have to say that John – despite the angel‘s reluctance – attempted a second time to prostrate himself before the angel, in 22: 8.9. But the angel again didn‘t let him do it. If veneration were indeed the same thing as worship, could it be, that the apostle John intended to worship the angel and thus disrespect God? Are we to assume that today‘s opposers of veneration are better acquainted than John, as to what is forbidden and what is permissible? Even if we did assume that John intended (perhaps out of ignorance) to worship the angel even though the angel hindered him, then why did John re-attempt it? Was he such an unrepentant idolater, that disciple ―whom the Lord loved‖? It is naturally out of the question, that the apostle didn‘t know that only God is worshipped. Consequently, his prostration was not of worship; it was his honorific veneration of the angel! And the angel had respectively declined this veneration, not because it was a sin, but because out of humility, he declined to be venerated by a saint. But the apostle also deemed it proper - despite the angel‘s reluctance - to repeat his attempt to venerate the angel, since this was not a sin. As opposed to the above, the angel that is referred to as the Commander-in-Chief of the hosts of the Lord, conceded to the prostration of Joshua (Joshua 5:13-15) ―And Joshua fell prostrate on the ground before him, and venerated him‖.

So that there is no doubt left whatsoever that the veneration of Saints is permissible as an honorific gesture, let‘s see what our Lord Jesus Christ‘s opinion is: It can be found in Revelations 3:7-10. There, the Lord Jesus Christ speaks to the ―angel‖ of the Church of Philadelphia, who is the Bishop of the local Church and not some heavenly angel (as confirmed by verse 10, where the ―angel‖ is numbered among those ―who inhabit the earth‖. If he inhabited the earth, he was definitely a human!) Since the Lord is praising him for his works, He says the following, important words: ―..behold, I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie, indeed, I will make them come and worship before your feet, and they will know that I have loved you.‖ Take notice here! The Lord Himself claims that He will make people fall prostrate before the feet of the Bishop of the Church of Philadelphia, because God has loved him. Is it possible that God would not have known if this was a sin? Would God have made them worship the Bishop as a god? Of course not! God clearly stated that they would be made to ―worship‖ him, so that they would see that God loved him. This obviously means that they would honorifically ―worship‖ the Bishop, as a servant of God, and not as a god. If, therefore, our critics believe that they are better versed than the Lord, then they may continue to criticize the honorific veneration that we bestow on the servants of God.

Is there such a thing as dead saints? ―But the Lord was speaking of a living person, not someone deceased! You Orthodox venerate the images of dead Saints!‖ Are we to believe that whoever makes such statements is the kind of person who would venerate the living? Or does he consider that to be idolatry as well? We have certainly made no distinction between living and ―dead‖ Saints, simply because there are no dead Saints! If there were dead Saints, then the Lord must have lied to Lazarus‘ sister, when he said that ―whomsoever is alive and believes in me, shall not die, for all eternity‖ (John, 11:26) ―For everyone lives in God‖ and ―He is not the God of the dead, but of the

living‖ (Luke, 20:38). John the apostle also indicates that all the faithful are alive, and that they observe and they pray in heaven (Revelations, 6: 9-11. 18: 20. 19: 1,4,6. 20: 4-6 etc.). The fact that their body is dead does not mean that they too are dead! ―…if the housing of our terrestrial body is abolished, yet from God we HAVE (=present tense, =as of our present life on earth; imagine in the future, in heaven) an eternal, non-handmade house in the heavens.‖ (Corinthians II, 5: 1-4). The saints are most certainly alive! And if the above examples from the Holy Bible speak of venerations of living saints, then the veneration of rested (not dead) saints is even more appropriate. They remained ―faithful to the death‖ and received the ―wreath of life‖ (Revelations, 2: 10). And if they are referred to as ―rested‖, the term pertains to their physical body, which is laying at rest until the day of its resurrection, and not their soul. They are presently ―the kings and priests of the Lord‖ (Revelations, 20: 4-6), and they deserve the appropriate honor. In Revelations, 6: 9-11, it appears that the ―rested‖ (in body) vigilantly observe from heaven whatever takes place on earth, and they pray for it. As for God, He ―judges their judgment‖ (Revelations, 18: 20.21) when hearkening to their prayers, and He acts according to their prayers. (Revelations, 8: 3-5). This is apparently where the fire that burns in the celestial altar – as well as whatever happens on earth – is the result of those prayers. All of the above are clear proof that the saints live and reign, alongside the Lord. The prayers of the saints ―But, only Jesus is the mediator between God and mankind! How can you pray to the saints?‖ someone might persist in asking. He should contemplate here: Don‘t we often ask our brethren to pray for us? Although we do agree that only Jesus is the mediator, how is it that we ask our living brethren to pray for us? Isn‘t that a relatively similar mediation also? Aren‘t we asking them to stand before the Lord for our sake? Even the Apostle Paul used to ask for the prayers of the Christians (Thessalonians I, 5:

25). If, therefore, we ask and we accept the prayers of our brethren (who have not yet proven to be faithful to the death) toGod for our sake, shouldn‘t we even more so ask our ―slept‖ brethren (who have proven themselves Saints to the death) for their prayers for us? Won‘t the Lord hear their prayers more certainly? Honoring holy relics ―And why do you honor their relics (remains)‖? a mistrustful reader may ask. Well, because they literally were ―temples of God‖ (Corinthians I, 3:16), just like any saint‘s body. These relics remain the vessels of divine Grace; for example, when they placed the corpse of a man inside the prophet Elisha‘s grave and it touched the bones of the buried prophet, the dead man was resurrected! (Kings II, 13 :21). This occurs much more frequently now, in the New Testament. . And let no-one wonder, why we honor the objects that belonged to the saints and have been preserved to our day. The same was done by Christians during the time of the Apostles, when they brought various items of the apostles to heal the sick, or used even their shadow!!! (Not to mention their images). (Acts, 5: 15. 19: 11,12). Both the bodies therefore of the Saints, as well as the objects that belonged to them, are all vessels of divine Grace, and this is why we honor them. (We do NOT worship them however). Finally, we would like to point out that in every era, God –through miraculous signs and revelations- ensures that we are kept informed of which saints He desires to make known to us, so that we may call upon them as assistants in our hour of grief, and difficulty. We do not arbitrarily select whom we will honor as saints. Our prayer however, is firstly addressed to God, and afterwards to them. And just as we ask for their prayers, we in turn pray for them, as the Lord Himself and the Church itself unite us all, whether we are in heaven, or on earth.

If Orthodox Christians are idolaters (as the Organization claims),then,do you know the theory of the Organization for the creation of the world? First pagan teaching: PANTHEISM!

The text from the book "The Holy Spirit" Watchtower writes many more, to understand how the Watchtower understands God. But before we proceed to that, remember what the Watchtower believes the relationship of God and the Holy Spirit, according to the book "You can live ..." "Living in a certain place in the sky ... To create these things, God did not need to be physically present. He can send his spirit,His active power, and do whatever He want, even when He is far away. " This is, the God of the Watchtower, "lost" somewhere in the universe, sends the Holy Spirit which is an impersonal force, and creates everything. Now, look again carefully what it says about "how" God created (in its view) the universe:

"This means that He is the unfathomable source of all energy. All things in the universe are bundles of molecules of His energy. Such clusters of molecules gathered in masses, large and small." Ie, everything in the material universe, composed by "molecules of the Holy Spirit", the ''force or energy of God'' (by the view of the Watchtower)! There were not created from zero, as we Christians believe, but,as the Watchtower, are "bundles" of the Holy Spirit! In other words, by God "proceeds" the Holy Spirit, and "condensed" into matter and energy,creating the universe! So,according to the Watchtower, the universe is not molded from zero, but CONSTITUTES RUNOFF of God! Watch out! In this point exactly, is a clearly pagan teaching, which they believed all pagan nations, and still believe! This pagan doctrine, which teaches that everything is a "runoff of God" has been condemned by the authority of the Church of Christ, and called PANTHEISM! This teaching of the Watchtower called Pantheism, and is idolatrous, because if everything is a "runoff" of God, not an ex nihilo creation, as we Christians believe, then: A. Everything is part of God. B. The essence of God and creatures confused, and God is not dissimilar from creatures, but they have a common substance. C. If anything material is runoff off the essence of God, then we can WORSHIP, so worshiping the Divine essence.

Consequently, the concept of "idolatry" for the pantheist is not only permissible, but necessary, so that through the material that is consubstantial with God, to worship God, Who is the source of this material! And then God was wrong to forbid idolatry! Because there's nothing not to participate of the Holy Spirit, which stems from God (by the Watchtower teaching), and condenses shaping everything!

Second pagan teaching: PLATONISM! The Church of Christ, from the beginning until today, teaches God-man Jesus Christ, having interpreted and followed correctly Bible teaching "God was the Word" (John 1:1) and "the Word became flesh" (John 1:14 ). The Bible is also filled with passages that speaks of the two natures of Christ, but the Watchtower has attended carefully to pervert thus,to unnoticed in the eyes of its sequences this great truth. So that the biblical teaching about God and man, perhaps demolishes the biggest dogma of ancient philosophy, the "No God associates with man" (Plato, Symposium, 203a). So if Orthodoxy theologies was with Platonic thoughts,it would never speak to a ''person perfect God and perfect Man''. Conversely, however, the Jehovah's Witnesses, have adopted the basic teachings of Arianism, which appeared in the 4th century AD, and was deeply influenced by the teachings of Plato. As wrote Professor Nicholas Matsoukas: "God against Arianism eg although becomes transcendent in everything, but the man possesses the ability to communicate with Him, because his created nature, as the created nature of the second Person of the Holy Trinity, has substantial kinship relationship with God. The Arianists and Eunomians did not accepted transcendent God in everything, as Platonism, but mainly accepted and eminently possibility of communication between God and man through created intermediaries"(Nicholas Matsoukas, Genesis and essence of the orthodox doctrine (series 'Analects Vlatadon' n.2), Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies, Thessaloniki, 1969, sel.145). Therefore, the degradation of Christ to a creature that Arianism teached the fourth century,and teach today by Jehovah's Witnesses were teaching necessitated by Platonic influence of Arius who was needed a created intermediary between God and man!

Third pagan teaching: MORTAL SOUL! (The teach that the soul dies). A third case refers to the Watchtower influence of ancient philosophy, the doctrine of the mortal soul. In his work "On the natural likes filosofois doctrines" we read, that Democritus (5th-4th century BC) and Epicurus (4th-3rd century AD), taught the soul "perishable, co-perishable with the body" ie that dies with the body (Pseudo-Plutarch, On the natural likes filosofois doctrines, 899C)! Beyond that, the doctrine as adopted by the 3rd century AD the "Thnitopsychites" an Arab sect,which presented emerging teachings in Christianity (Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, Book 6, ch.37, PG 20, 597B) As you see, the source of the teachings of the Watchtower Society in the matter of the soul is Democritus and Epicurus who have expressed clearly the doctrine of 'slave' for the soul, 23 centuries before Jehovah's Witnesses appear! In conclusion, dear Jehovah's Witnesses, your doctrine have "infected by ancient Greek pagan teachings and philosophies,also the Watchtower "allow to penetrate in its doctrine lots of them," but instead we see in its publications to be declared clearly Platonic-pagan teachings! At this point we should also note this: In more than a century of history, the Society not only has preach pagan teachings (as demonstrated above), but has repeatedly declared as 'channel of God' dark and misguided teachings even SATANIC teachings,always in the name of God! Let's look closely at this case to see how many times in the past the 'channel of God' has served darkness supposedly as 'light of Jehovah and 'food in time'. We inform at this point that the phraseology 'served' is not arbitrary, but comes from the Watchtower of 1960, pg.464, titled article ''Awake The faithful and discreet slave'' where in a photo shows the ''waiter of slave'' as a waiter serving a platter of ''delicious food'' to the faithful! So, as many as texts and conditions formulated by Councils or Fathers, do not constitute a "search" for truth. The Church held the truth from the outset. If there was not the cheating of Tradition by heretics,it would not must be given the similar answers.

That is why it is so childish complaints of Jehovah's Witnesses, who wonder why the word "consubstantial" is not literal in ... New Testament! Have you ever thought dear Jehovah's Witnesses, that your ancestors-as the denial of Christ the Areianists, appeared in the 4th century AD ...? And of course, the Church's position is specific for this condition, that the origin of the content is Biblical.That is why Athanasius the Great also speaks of the term "homoousios" (=of the same essence) - a term that is not found exactly like that in the Bible but was nevertheless used, on the basis of all that was delivered to the Church by Christ the Saviour Himself and by the Holy Bible. (PG 25,468C). And of course, when John Chrysostom speaks of "consubstantial" invokes passages of Scripture: "He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father" (John 14.9), " I and My Father are one." (Jn 10, 30), "For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will." (John 5.21),''that all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father who hath sent Him.'(Jn 5.23) etc.. Heretics speak for "loans" from philosophical theologies, and it sounds funny, since the same doctrinal texts of the Church does accept the ancient philosophical texts ONLY for their educational role, but denied any use of contained pagan theology which they condemn ... "Anathema to those who study Greek lessons and do not use them solely for educating themselves, but who also follow their redundant teachings and accept them as truths, and in fact actually confess their faith in them." George Metallinos notes that these doctrinal text, called "Synodicon of Orthodoxy": "Encodes the long patristic attitude that differentiates the study of Greek philosophy, the educational use of words, the acceptance of theology. Christianity, in its authentic expression as Orthodoxy, is a continuation of prophetic empirical theology. Trapped to Ancient Greek theology thought ... remain the sects''. One example is sufficient to confirm the above words, ie pagan philosophy adopted only by sects. An ancient sect which imitates Jehovah's Witnesses is Arianism, who did not accept the divinity of Christ, although its clearly express in the Gospel ("God was the Word" John 1.1).

Why they did not accept the divinity of Christ? But because they was deeply influenced by Platonism. One of the basic tenets of Platonic philosophy is that: "No God associates with man" (Plato, Symposium, 203a). He who "theologise" with meditation and Platonic thought, he could not imagine the Orthodox incarnation of Christ and led to Arianism or to Jehovah's Witnesses. And yet, because doctrine is a testimony and not a thought, this axiom of ancient pagan theology DEMOLISHED without hesitation by the Fathers, since according to term of Faith of 4th Ecumenical Synod of Chalcedon confirmed the ancient tradition that: ''This one and the same Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son [of God] must be confessed to be in two natures, unconfusedly, immutably, indivisibly, inseparably [united], and that without the distinction of natures being taken away by such union, but rather the peculiar property of each nature being preserved and being united in one Person and subsistence, not separated or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son and only-begotten, God the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets of old have spoken concerning Him, and as the Lord Jesus Christ has taught us, and as the Creed of the fathers has delivered unto us''.

Jehovah's Witnesses has,also tendency to confuse the Uncreated with the created, not doing no such distinction, in agreement with Plato, and in contrast with the Church! So we see that the Platonic "loan" theology of the Fathers are jokes of a picturesque sect, the "Jehovah's Witnesses" or other liberal Protestants and atheists who wish to oppose the long tradition of the Church everyone for his own reasons.

6) Question: How whatever scares and turn away Satan is ''demonic''? (as the ''Watchtower'' claims)? (The Cross, The Holy Communion, Holy Temples, The holy water, fasting, baptism,Unction ETC.) Except ALL those, how can we be protected by the devil? By Archimandrite Vasilios Bakoyiannis The Cross, Relics and the Gospel

The Cross: In Thrace, Greece, Christians and Muslims live together in harmony. There was once a good, well-intentioned shepherd who was a Muslim, and, on comparing the religion of Muhammad with Christianity, came to the conclusion that Christianity was much better than Islam. His interest in Christ increased all the time. He began to talk, to study, to ask about Christianity. Then he decided to renounce Islam and become a Christian. His father learned about it and did his best to change the young man‘s mind. He was unable to do so, though, because his son was convinced. In the end, the father had recourse to an occultist. ―I want you to stop my son from thinking about Christ,‖ he told him. The sorcerer, certain of his success, set to work. The first time he failed, so he tried again. He failed again. Third attempt, third failure. Then he realized what was wrong. He called the father and told him directly, ―If you want the magic to work, tell your son to get rid of those bits of wood he wears round his neck!‖ What was it? The young Muslim had seen that Christians wear a cross round their necks, and so he did the same. He took two bits of wood, made them into the form of a cross and wore them around his neck. And thanks to the cross, which the devil fears, the magic didn‘t work. Remember, when the demons heard Arthur the missionary talking about Golgotha, where the Lord was crucified, they became furious and told him to stop. Relics: The emperor Julian the Apostate went to a famous sorcerer at the oracle of Apollo, at Daphne, Antioch. But right next to the oracle was a cemetery where there were the relics of the holy martyr Babylas. The sorcerer couldn‘t speak. He told the emperor, ―If you want me to tell you your fortune, you‘ll have to break the reliquary of St Babylas. That‘s what is keeping my mouth shut.‖ Prayer and Fasting: We‘ve seen how fasting and prayer put the Devil to flight. We‘ll do no more here then

and note the following: The race of demons, says the Lord, is defeated by prayer and fasting. Fasting has to do with the body, prayer with the soul. So the whole person engages in the struggle against the devil. Let‘s dwell a little on prayer. I would remind you of the famous sorcerer who went to Kolwezi, in Zaire, in 1984, and set about curing people. Father Meletios, the missionary from the Holy Monastery of Gregoriou on the Holy Mountain, who was an eye-witness to the events, tells us of the sequel. In October 1994, the sorcerer returned to the same town, preceded by a widespread publicity campaign. Banners were stretched over the main streets and loud speakers announced his arrival: ―The saviour is returning.‖ They‘d also set up a platform on one of the main roads, where the sorcerer would stand. Lots of people hastened to make their way there, to present themselves before him in order to regain their health. The ―saviour‖ arrived. There was pandemonium. His timetable was such that he would remain in the town for a week. • On Day 1 he went up onto the platform to heal the sick who were waiting anxiously. He made his prayer. There was no result. Three hours passed and still there was no result. • On Day 2, he made his prayer again. But again he had nothing to show for it. Meanwhile, the loudspeakers on the streets were still blaring his arrival. • On Day 3, he still had nothing to show for his efforts. People began to feel uneasy. • On Day 4, there was still nothing. Now people began to get angry. All hope wasn‘t lost. There were still three days left. He did everything he could, but still without any result at all. And then, on the last day, covered in confusion, he was forced to admit to the disappointed crowd that this was the first time that anything like this had happened to him, and that it had happened here, in Kolwezi. Well, what had happened? Father Meletios hadn‘t been idle. He‘d used the visit of the sorcerer to shame the devil, to benefit the Orthodox Christians and to glorify God. Every time the shaman mounted the platform, Father Meletios and all the Orthodox Christians gathered in the Church of St George, sang the Supplicatory Canon (Paraklesis) to the Mother of God, and read the exorcism prayers of St Basil the Great.

When the famous shaman publicly confessed that this was the first time that anything like this had happened to him, what he didn‘t know was that, for the first time, he‘d been opposed by the weapons of the Orthodox Church. Those Who Live a Sacramental Life Unction: A priest friend of mine told me the following: A parishioner of his had his suspicions that spells were being cast against him. So he asked a priest to come and do a Holy Unction service. A few days later, they met on the street and he said to him, ―Father. The Unction worked! We‘ve discovered that when you were saying the service, the witch started shouting that some priest or other was binding her hands.‖ So the Sacraments are also weapons against magic. Confession: This is a very great weapon against magic. The devil himself tells us, ―I‘m afraid of that bath that the Christians have in Church.‖ ―Never go to confession,‖ he said himself to a sorcerer‘s convention. Holy Communion: ―The thing I‘m frightened of most of all,‖ said the devil, ―is what the Christians eat and drink in church, so long as they do so with a clear conscience.‖ Holy Communion is the most deadly weapon against magic. So if you take Communion, magic won‘t affect you. Conclusion: If you distance yourself from sin and live in the Church, with its Sacraments, you have nothing to fear! You‘ll never, never, be attacked by magic. Who Are Affected by Magic? Those Who Live in Sin

The experience of our Church tells us that those who commit sins, especially those of the flesh, are vulnerable to magic. In other words, their sins disarm them completely and they surrender to the appetites of the devil. But if you wear a cross or have relics or a Gospel at home, how can magic affect you? As long as Julian the Apostate made the sign of the Cross with unsullied hands, the demons that were attacking him at the behest of a sorcerer disappeared like smoke. But once he‘d slaughtered a little child after being told to do so by the sorcerer and had bathed his hands in blood, it didn‘t matter how many times he made the sign of the Cross. It didn‘t work and the demons overwhelmed him. His sin had made him unworthy of divine protection. Therefore, if you commit mortal sins, then neither relics, the Cross, nor the Gospel will be of any avail against magic. Irregular Church Attendance & Communion At the Divine Liturgy, people who are possessed howl, ―I‘m burning, I‘m burning.‖ What are they burning from? It is from divine grace, which is ―emitted,‖ which wells up, at the Liturgy. Therefore the Divine Liturgy is fire which burns the devil (and magic). So people who are irregular in their church attendance can be affected by magic. This is why: • The devil himself, at a meeting of occultists, forbade them to attend the Divine Liturgy. • St Macarius the Egyptian told a woman who‘d been put under a spell that she was never to absent herself from church. Irregular Communion ―The magic worked against you because you hadn‘t had Communion for five weeks,‖ St Macarius told the above woman. So, if you don‘t have Communion for a long time, you‘re giving the devil a stick to beat you with. ―… So that by absenting myself too long from Your Communion, I may not become a prey to the wolf of souls.‖

What Should Be Done? Anyone who‘s ―bewitched‖ should: • Cut themselves off from sin. • Go to church, confess, and partake of the Holy Mysteries. • Drink blessed water (Agiasmos) every day. • Pray and fast strictly. • Have the exorcism prayers read once a week. ―You Cannot Serve Two Masters‖(Matthew 6:24). THE PERPETRATORS - The Impostors • Those lay-people who ―remove magic‖ and say prayers from our Church. • The fire-walkers who, with the icon of Sts Constantine and Helen (and the power of the devil!) walk barefoot on red-hot charcoal. • The sorcerer who was killed and the witch who was convicted who had a special room (―oratory‖) in their house with icons, incense and magic symbols. • Sorcerers who might give advice to have an unction service read. Why do they muddle up our pure faith with blasphemous, devilish elements? They do it in order to deceive naïve people and gain their confidence. In other words, who (even atheists!) would dare visit them if, in their rooms, they had only skulls? What if there weren‘t any icons and incense to be seen? And what if they didn‘t advise people to have an unction service read? Are they or are they not charlatans and impostors? ―The Holy Things to Dogs‖ Dogs (and pigs) don‘t know anything about ―holy things‖. They wouldn‘t know how to use them, to reverence them or to invoke their blessing. Were we to give anything holy, they‘d just render it useless. Worse than that, they‘d defile it. Here, the dogs and pigs mentioned in St Matthew‘s Gospel are people who behave towards holy things as dumb beasts would. In the case in point, they‘re the occultists and mediums who, next to their skulls and pentagrams and such, have holy icons or the Precious Cross and in this way defile the holy things. They are people who have the holy things as a bait for their innocent victims instead of for blessing and

sanctification. They are people, and they are not alone in this, who mix suspect and treacherous words with the words of the Church. ―An Abomination to the Lord‖ What we mentioned above, and every Satanic ritual, is explicitly forbidden by Scripture. And not only that, but ―everyone who does such things is an abomination to the Lord.‖ Anyone engaging in such practices is despicable in the sight of the Lord! Those Who Deny Christ Such people are not only impostors, they‘re not only profane, but they deny Christ. How can this not be so when, by their ―prayers‖ they invoke the aid of Satan and not that of Christ? Repentance All those who want to escape eternal hell must repent. They have to cut every tie with the works of darkness. Otherwise, on the dread Day of Judgment, the Lord will say to them: ―Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and everyone who practices falsehood.‖ They will be thrown into the lake of fire and will burn eternally. THE VICTIMS ―But They Are Christians‖ Naïve Christians, when they visit a medium, for example, put forward the following justification for their actions: ―But she‘s a Christian. She‘s got icons. She talks about God.‖ As we‘ve already said, she does this in order to trap you. St John Chrysostom adds, ―She uses the name of God in order to curse Him. While saying that she‘s a Christian, she actually does what the idolaters do! The demons also referred to God but they were still demons. The Lord upbraided them and expelled them. Censure In October 1997, in a neighbourhood of Patras, Greece, the following event took place.

A family was facing a particular problem and, instead of going to the Church, had recourse to a medium. The medium gave them a little bottle of water and advised them to put it in a corner of a room at home and to get a priest to come and read a blessing service. This they did. In the midst of the members of the family, and of friends and relations, the service of the Blessing of the Waters was read. At the end, the family remembered the little bottle of water that the medium had given them and threw that into the water as well. What was the result? The priest‘s metal Cross, which was still in the water, broke in two. Everyone was astounded. God had answered: You can‘t be with Him and with the devil. If you are with God and the devil, then you are with the devil alone. Repent! THE EXTENT OF THE SIN Suppose you go to one of those dens of Satan. Where do you think you‘re going? Do you realize that you‘re going to those whom the Lord can‘t abide; to those who deny Him, to charlatans? Do you have any idea what you‘re doing, and how great your sin is? Saul King Saul was worried about his future fate, so in order to learn something about it, he had recourse to a witch. However, because he did not turn to God at this difficult moment in his life, God punished him with death! We would stress this very strongly: God put King Saul to death precisely because he went to a witch and not to God. Saul believed that the witch would be of greater help to him than the Almighty Lord. He believed in the witch rather than the Lord! The Christian If the Lord was so angry with Saul - He put him to death - who lived before Christ, how much angrier will He be with a Christian who does these things when he or she should know better? A Christian swears to ―renounce Satan and all his pride‖. Saul spurned God at a difficult time in his life. Well, any Christian who has recourse to

occultists of any description similarly spurns the Lord. • These people (Christians!) believe in the sorcerer, the astrologer, the medium, rather than Christ. • They believe that they‘ll get more help from charlatans than from the Lord. • They believe in bat‘s bones, horse shoes, the pentagram and what not, but they don‘t believe in the Lord and His Precious Cross! Penance St Gregory of Nyssa puts the Christian who follows ―Satanic pride‖ in the same category as those who deny Christ. They have to do without Communion for at least six years! (Canon 61, Holy Sixth Ecumenical Synod). Those who make charms, which they then wear by invoking the devil, are similarly subject to the same heavy penance, six year‘s abstention from Communion. • See then precisely how you walk, not as unwise people, but as wise ones. • Redeem the time, for the days are evil. • Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. From the book Confronting the Devil, Magic & the Occult, Orthodox Book Centre, Athens 2003

Confession - Confessor - Confessing By Monk Moses of the Holy Mountain Source: http://www.impantokratoros.gr/83FE9A44.el.aspx The excerpt below has been taken from the book titled "REPENTANCE AND CONFESSION", by Monk Moses of the Holy Mountain, "Orthodoxi Kypseli" Publications, Thessaloniki. Confession is a God-given commandment, and it is one of the Sacraments of our Church. Confession is not a formal, habitual ("to be on the safe side", or, "in view of upcoming feast-days"), forced and unprepared act, springing from an isolated duty or obligation and for psychological relief only. Confession should always be combined with repentance. A Holy Mountain Elder used to say: "Many confess, but few repent!"

(Elder Aemilianos of the Simonopetra Monastery, Holy Mountain). Repentance is a freely-willed, internally cultivated process of contrition and sorrow for having distanced ourselves from God through sin. True repentance has nothing to do with intolerable pain, excessive sorrow and relentless guilty feelings. That would not be sincere repentance, but a secret egotism, a feeling of our "ego" being trampled on; an anger that is directed at our self, which then wreaks revenge because it is exposing itself and is put to shame - a thing that it cannot tolerate. Repentance means a change in our thoughts, our mentality; it is an about-face; it is a grafting of morality and an abhorrence of sin. Repentance also means a love of virtue, benevolence, and a desire, a willingness and a strong disposition to be re-joined to Christ through the Grace of the almighty Holy Spirit. Repentance begins in the depths of the heart, but it culminates necessarily in the sacrament of divine and sacred Confession. During confession, one confesses sincerely and humbly before the confessor, as though in the presence of Christ. No scientist, psychologist, psychoanalyst, psychiatrist, sociologist, philosopher or theologian can replace the confessor. No icon - not even the most miracle-working one - can provide what the confessor's stole can: the absolution of sins. The confessor takes the person under his care; he adopts him and ensures he is reborn spiritually, which is why he is called a "spiritual father". Normally, spiritual paternity is lifelong, sacred and powerful - even more powerful than a family bond. Spiritual birth is a painful process. The confessor must keep track of the confessing soul, with a fear of God (as one who is "accountable to God"), with understanding, humility and love, and guide him with discretion in the ever-upward course of his in-Christ life. The confessor-priest has been given a special blessing by his bishop for the undertaking of his confessional opus. However, the gift of "binding and un-binding" sins is initially acquired through his ordination as presbyter, when he is rendered a successor to the Apostles. Thus, validity and canonicity in Apostolic succession, through bishops, is of central and great importance. Like all the other holy sacraments of our Church, the sacrament of Confession is performed (and it bestows Grace on the faithful), not in conjunction with the skill, the scientism, the literacy, the eloquence, the energy and the artfulness of the priest - not even with his virtue and holiness - but through the canonicity (validity) of his priesthood and through the "Master of Ceremonies" - the Holy Spirit. The possible sins of the priest do not obstruct divine Grace during the Sacraments.

Woe betide, if we were to doubt (on account of the unworthiness of the priest) that the bread and the wine actually become the Body and the Blood of Christ during the Divine Liturgy! This of course does not mean that the priest should not have to constantly concern himself with his own "cleanliness". Thus, there is no such thing as "good" or "bad" confessors. Each and every confessor provides the exact same absolution. However, we do have the right to choose our confessor; and of course we have the right to turn to the one who truly makes us feel at ease with him, spiritually. To constantly change our confessor however, is not a very sober decision; this kind of tendency does not reveal spiritual maturity. But confessors should, respectively, not fret excessively -or even create problemswhen a spiritual child of theirs happens to depart from them. This may mean that they were morbidly attached to each other (sentimentally, to the person. and not to Christ, nor to the Church). They may also regard that departure as an insult; one that is demeaning to them and makes them think there is no-one better than them, or, it may give them a feeling that the other "belongs" to them exclusively and they can therefore dominate them and in fact even behave forcibly towards them, as if they are repressed and confined subordinates. We did mention that the confessor is a spiritual father, and that spiritual fatherhood and spiritual childbirth entails labour. Thus, it is only natural for the confessor to feel sorrow upon the departure of his spiritual child. However, it is preferable for him to pray for his child's spiritual progress and its union to the Church, even despite its disengagement from him. He must wish for, and not against that child. The confessor's opus is not just the superficial hearing of a person's sins and the reciting of the prayer of absolution afterwards. Nor is it restricted to the hour of confession. Like a good father, the confessor continuously cares for his child; he listens to it and observes it carefully, he counsels it appropriately, he guides it along the lines of the Gospel, he highlights its talents, he does not place unnecessary burdens on it, he imposes canons with leniency only when he must, he consoles it when it is disheartened, weighed down, resentful, exhausted, and he heals it accordingly, without ever discouraging it, but constantly pursuing the struggle for the eradication of its passions and the harvesting of virtues; constantly shaping its eternal soul to be Christ-like. This ever-developing paternal and filial relationship between confessor and spiritual

child eventually culminates in a feeling of comfort, trust, respect, sanctity and elation. When confessing, one opens his heart to the confessor and discloses the innermost, the basest and most unclean - in fact, all of his - secrets, his most intimate actions and detrimental desires, even those that he would not want to confess to himself, nor tell his next-of-kin or his closest friend. For this reason, the confessor must have an absolute respect for the unlimited trust that is being shown to him by the person confessing. This trust most assuredly builds up with time, but also by the fact that the confessor is strictly bound (in fact to the death) by the divine and Sacred Canons of the Church, to the confidentiality that confession entails. In Orthodox confession there are of course no general instructions, because the spiritual guidance that each unique soul requires is entirely personalized. Each person is unprecedented, with a particular psychosynthesis, a different character, differing potentials and abilities, limitations, tendencies, tolerances, knowledge, needs and dispositions. With the Grace of God and with divine enlightenment, the confessor must discern all these characteristics, in order to decide what he can utilize best, so that the person confessing will be helped in the best possible manner. At times, leniency will be required, while at other times, austerity. The same thing does not apply to each and every person. Nor should the confessor ALWAYS be strict, just for the sake of being called strict and respected as such; and he should likewise not ALWAYS be excessively lenient, in order to become the preferred choice and be regarded as a "spiritual father of many". What is required of him is a fear of God, discernment, honesty, humility, deliberation, understanding and prayer. "Economy" (Oekonomia: to make allowances for something, exceptionally) is not demanded of the person confessing, nor is it proper for the confessor to make it a rule. "Economy" must remain an exception. "Economy" must also be a temporary measure (Archmandrite George Gregoriates). When the reasons for implementing it no longer exist, it must naturally be retracted. The same sin can be confronted in numerous ways. A canon is not always necessary. A canon is not intended as a form of punishment. It is educative by nature. A canon is not imposed for the sake of appeasing an offended God and an atonement of the sinner in the face of Divine Justice; that is an entirely heretic teaching. A canon is usually implemented during an immature confession, with the intent to arouse awareness and a consciousness of the magnitude of one's sin.

According to Orthodox teaching, "sin" is not so much the transgression of a law, as it is a lack of love towards God. "Love, and do whatever you want", the blessed Augustine used to say... A canon is implemented for the purpose of completing one's repentance in view of confession, which is why fr. Athanasios of Meteora rightly says: "just as the confessor is not permitted to make public the sins being confessed to him, so must the person confessing not make public the particular canon that the confessor has imposed in his specific case, as it is the resultant of many parameters. A confessor acts as the provider of the Grace of the Holy Spirit. During the hour of the Sacrament of Confession, he does not function as a psychologist and scientist. He functions as a priest, as an experienced doctor, as a caring father. When listening to the sins of the person confessing, he prays to God to give him enlightenment, to advise him what the best "medication" for cure will be, and to gauge the degree and the quality of that confession. The confessor does not place himself opposite a confessing person with curiosity, suspicion, envy, excessive austerity, power and arrogance; but equally not with indifference, thoughtlessly, carelessly and wearily. The humility, love and attention of the confessor will greatly help the person confessing. The confessor should not ask too many, too unnecessary and too indiscreet questions. He must especially interrupt any detailed descriptions of various sins (especially the carnal ones) and even the disclosure of names, to safeguard himself even more. But the person confessing should also not feel afraid, or hesitate and feel embarrassed; he should feel respect, trust, honour and show reverence to the confessor. This clime of sanctity, mutual respect and trust must be mainly nurtured, inspired and developed by the confessor. Our holy mother the Orthodox Church is the Body of the Resurrected Christ; She is a vast infirmary, for the healing of frail, sinning faithful from the traumas, the wounds and the illnesses of sin; from pathogenic demons and from the venomous demonic traps and the influences of demonically-driven passions. Our Church is not a branch office of the Ministry of Social Services, nor does She compete against the various societies for social welfare - without this meaning that She does not acknowledge this significant and well-meaning opus, or that She Herself does not offer such services bounteously, admirably and wondrously; it is because the Church is mainly a provider of a meaning to life, of redemption and salvation of the faithful "for the sake of whom Christ died", through their participation in the

sacraments of the Church. "The priest's stole is a planing instrument" - as the Elder Paisios of the Holy Mountain used to say - "that planes and straightens out a person; it is a therapeutic scalpel that excises passions, and not a trowel for workaholics, or a symbol of power. It is a servant's apron intended for ministering to people, for providing therapy and salvation." God uses the priest for the forgiveness of His creature. It is plainly stated in the absolution blessing: "May God forgive you - through me the sinner - everything, both in the present age and in the future one, and may He render you blameless, before His awesome Seat of Judgment; having no longer any worry for the crimes that have been confessed, may you go forth in peace." Sins that have not been confessed will continue to burden a person, even in the life to come. Confessed sins should not be re-confessed; it would be as though one doesn't believe in the grace of the Sacrament. God is of course aware of them, but it is for the sake of absolution, humbling and therapy that they need to be outwardly confessed. As for the occasional penance imposed for sins, one must realize that it does not negate the Church's love for the person, but that it is simply an educative imposition, for a better awareness of one's offenses. According to Saint Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain, "confession is a willed, verbal revealing of one's evil deeds and words and thoughts; solemn, accusatory, direct, without shame, decisive, to be executed before a legitimate spiritual father." This God-bearing saint has succinctly, fully and meaningfully clarified that confession must be willed, free, effortless, without the confessor straining to extract the person's confession. It should be with solemnity, in other words, with an awareness of the sorrow that he caused God with his sin, and not with sentimental, hypocritical, fainthearted tears. Genuine "solemnity" implies an inner collapsing, remorse, a hatred towards sin, a love of virtue, and a feeling of gratitude to the Gift-Giver God. "Accusatory" implies a responsible confession, without attempts of justification, subterfuge, chicanery, irresponsibility and scapegoating; with sincere self-reproach and genuine self-humiliation that carries the so-called "happy-sorrow" and the "joyous bereavement" defined by the Church. "Direct" implies a confession with all sincerity, directness and precision, valour and courage, severity and bravery. It often happens that during the hour of confession, one avoids admitting his defeat, his fall and his weakness and by means of eloquent and long-winded descriptions attempts to deflect his share of responsibility, with twists and turns and half-truths - or even by accusing

others - all for the sake of preserving (even at that hour) a prim and proper ego. A confession "without shame" implies a portrayal of our true, deplorable self. Shame is a good thing to have, prior to sin and not afterwards, and in the presence of the confessor. The shame felt during confession they say will free us from the sin during the Ultimate Judgment, given that whatever the confessor absolves will not be judged again. A "direct" confession implies that it should be clean, specific, sincere, and accompanied by the decision that the faithful will never repeat the sins he has confessed to. Furthermore, confession should be continuous, so that the "willingly recurring" passions (according to Saint John of the Ladder) are not strengthened, but rather, are cured sooner. Thus, old sins will not be entirely blotted out from memory, there will be a regular self-monitoring, self-observation, self-awareness and self-reproach; Divine Grace will not abandon; demonic entrapment will be averted much more easily, and reminiscence of Death will not seem as horrid and terrible. Another thing that is all too frequently observed - and we admit this with deep pain and abundant love - is that sermons are not always as Orthodox as they should be; in other words, they only manage to sound like just another commentary on an unimportant news item, thus transforming the sacred pulpit into yet another television "frame" where we can air our own opinion on daily events and occurrences. The Orthodox sermon however is by nature mainly ecclesiological, Christological, salvatory, hagiological and beneficial to the soul. The sermon on repentance as delivered by the Prophets, the holy Baptist, the Saviour Christ and all the Saints remains forever opportune and a necessity. A basic prerequisite for partaking in the holy sacraments and for an upward spiritual course is a purity of heart; a purity that is rid of miscellaneous sins; the spirit of avarice and blissfulness inspired by today's hyper-consumerist society; the spirit of God-despised pride in a world of narcissism, individualism, non-humility, non-philanthropy, arrogance and the bizarre; the demonic spirit of mischievous thoughts, fantasies and imaginations and unclean and obscure suspicions and envy. Purity of heart has become a rare ornament - in brotherly and conjugal relations, in obligations towards colleagues, in friendships, in conversations, in thoughts, in desires, in pastoral callings. The so-called Mass Media have lapsed and become mere sources of contamination. Forgotten are neptic awareness. ascetic sobriety, traditional frugality, simplicity and gallantry. This has led to a polluting of the soul's

rationalizing ability, an arousal of its desirous aspect towards avarice, while its willpower has become severely blunted, thus drawing a weakened person towards evil, without any impediments or limitations. Nowadays prevail self-justification, excuses for our passions, beautification of sin, and its reinforcement through modern psychological supports. The admission of mistakes is regarded as belittlement, weakness and generally improper. The constant justification of our self, and the meticulous transferal of responsibilities elsewhere have created a human being that is confused, divided, disturbed, worn-out, miserable and self-absorbed, taunted by the devil, and captured in his dark meshes. There is a prevalence of foolish rationalism nowadays, which observes evangelical virtues and Conciliar canons according to its liking, preference and convenience, on important issues such as fasting, abstinence, childbearing, morality, modesty, honesty and precision. In view of all the above - none of which I believe has been exaggerated - it is our belief that the opus of a confessor is not an easy one. Ordinary coercion to repent and the cultivating of humility are nowadays inadequate; the fold requires catechesis, re-evangelizing, spiritual training, as well as a spiritual about-face, in order to acquire powerful antibodies. Resistance, reaction and the confronting of the powerful current of de-sanctification, of secularization, of demoting heroism, of eudemonism and of amassing wealth are imperative. The young generation is in need of special attention, instruction and love, given that their upbringing has not proven to be of any help in their becoming aware of the meaning and the purpose of life, or of the void and the indecorousness, the lawlessness and the darkness of sin. Another serious problem - even for our Christians - is the often over-zealous quest for a labour-less, toil-free and grief-free life. We are in search of Cyreneans to carry our crosses. We refuse to lift up our own personal cross. We have no idea of the depth and breadth of our own cross. We bow in reverence before the Cross in church, we cross ourselves, but we do not embrace our personal cross. In the long run, we would like a non-crucified Christianity. But there cannot be an Easter Sunday without a Good Friday. We honour martyrs and saints, but we ourselves do not want to suffer any hardships, any postponements, any difficulties. Fasting is too difficult a task to accomplish; we feel resentful during an illness; we cannot tolerate any harsh words, not even when we

are to blame, therefore how could we possibly tolerate injustice, slander, persecution and exile, the way our saints did? It is an indisputable fact that the contemporary, secular spirit of convenience, leisure and excessive consumerism has greatly affected the measure of spiritual living. Generally speaking, we demand a non-ascetic Christianity... Orthodoxy however has the ascetic Gospel as its basis. One other serious problem of our time is man's morbid and undue reliance on logic, intellect, knowledge, and personal judgment - we are referring to the over-fed and ultimately tiring rationalization. Neptic Orthodox theology teaches us to consider our Nous a tool, and to lower it, into the Heart. Our Church does not cultivate and produce intellectuals. To us, rationalization is not a philosophical mentality, but a clearly sin-oriented life view - a form of atheism - since it goes contrary to the commandment of placing our faith, hope, love and trust in God. A rationalist judges everything using the filter of his own mind and only with his finite mind, with himself and his sovereign ego as the epicentre, and does not place any trust in divine Providence, divine Grace and divine Assistance in his life. By often regarding himself as infallible, a rationalist does not allow God to intervene in his life and therefore judge him. That way, he is convinced that he is not in need of confession. Saint Simeon the New Theologian says however that, for one to believe he has not fallen into any sins is the greatest of falls and fallacies, and the greatest sin of all. Certain newer theologians speak of "missing the target" and not of "sinning", in their desire to blunt the natural protesting of one's conscience. The self-sufficiency displayed by certain churchgoers and fasting Christians can at times be hiding a latent pharisaic stance, i.e., that "they are not like the others" and therefore are not in need of confession. According to the holy fathers of our Church, the greatest of evils is Pride; it is the mother of all passions, according to Saint John of the Ladder. It is the mother of many offspring, the first ones being vainglory and self-vindication. Pride is a form of denial of God; it is an invention of wicked demons, the result of too much flattery and praise, which in turn results in a debilitation and exhaustion of man, God-despised censure, anger, rage, hypocrisy, the lack of compassion, misanthropy, and blasphemy. Pride is a passion that is formidable, difficult, powerful and hard to cure. Pride is also strong in many ways, and with many faces. It manifests itself as vainglory, boastfulness, conceit, arrogance, presumptuousness, swell-headedness, insolence, self-importance, megalomania, ambition, self-love, vanity, avarice,

flesh-loving, a love for leadership, accusations and arguments. Also as smugness, favouritism, insolence, disrespect, outspokenness, insensitivity, contradiction, obstinacy, disobedience, sarcasm, stubbornness, disregard, indignity, perfectionism and hypersensitivity. Finally, pride can lead to impenitence. The tongue often becomes the instrument of pride, through unchecked, long-winded, useless talking; gossiping, silliness; vain , insincere, indiscreet, two-tongued, diplomatic, pretended and mocking conversations. Out of the seven deadly sins many other passions spring forth. Having mentioned the offspring of Pride, we then have Avarice, which gives birth to the love of money, greed, stinginess, lack of charity, hardheartedness, fraud, usury, injustice, deceitfulness, simony, bribery, gambling. Fornication manifests itself in myriads of ways, for example, envy - with its underhanded and evil spite, insatiable gluttony, anger, as well as suspect negligence and lack of care. Special attention should also be paid to many un-Orthodox elements in family life, which we believe should be examined carefully by confessors and the persons involved. The avoidance of childbearing, the idolizing of one's children (when regarded as the extension of the parents' ego); overprotecting them, or constantly watching their moves and savagely oppressing them. Marriage is an arena for exercising humility, mutual leeway and mutual respect, and not the parallel journey of two egotisms despite a lifelong coupling and coexistence. The devil dances for joy whenever there is no forgiveness in human weaknesses and in everyday mistakes. Parents will help their children significantly, not with excessive courtesy outside the home, but with their peaceful, sober and loving example in the home, on a daily basis. The participation of the children together with the parents in the sacrament of confession will fortify them with divine Grace in an experiential life in Christ. When parents ask for forgiveness with sincerity, they simultaneously teach their children humility, which destroys all demonic plots. In a household where love, harmony, understanding, humility and peace bloom, there the blessings of God will be bounteous and the home becomes a castle that is impervious to the malice of the world around. The upbringing of children with the element of forgiveness creates a healthy family hearth, which will inspire them and strengthen them for their own futures. One other huge matter that constitutes an obstacle for repentance and confession is self-vindication, which plagues many people of the Church also. Its basis is, as we

mentioned earlier, demonic Pride. A classic example is the Pharisee of the Gospel parable. The self-vindicating person has apparently positive elements, which he will over-praise and for which he would like to be honoured and praised. He is happy to be flattered and to demean and humiliate others. He has excessive self-esteem, he vindicates himself to excess and believes that God is necessarily obliged to reward him. In the long run, he is a poor wretch, who, in his wretched state makes others wretched. He is possessed by nervousness and agitation and he is demanding, thus imprisoning himself; these are tendencies that will not allow him to open the door to divine mercy, through his repentance. An offspring of Pride is censure, which is unfortunately also a habit of many Christians, who tend to concern themselves more with others than themselves. This is a phenomenon of our time and of a society that pushes people into a continuous observation of others, and not of the self. Modern man's myriad occupations and activities do not want him to ever remain alone to study, to contemplate, to pray, to attain self-awareness, self-critique, self-control and to be reminded of death. The so-called Mass Media are incessantly preoccupied with scandal-seeking, persistently and at length, with human passions, with sins, with others' misdemeanors. These kinds of things provoke, impress, and, even if they do not scandalize, they nevertheless burden the soul and the mind with filth and ugliness and they actually reassure us, by making us believe that "we are better" than those advertised. Thus, a person becomes accustomed to the mediocrity, the tepidity and the transience of superficial day-to-day life, never comparing himself to saints and heroes. This is how censure prevails in our time - by giving man the impression that he is justly imposing a kind of cleansing, by mud-slinging at others, albeit contaminating himself by generating malice, hatred, hostility, resentfulness, envy and frigidity. Saint Maximus the Confessor in fact states that the one who constantly scrutinizes other's sins, or judges his brothers based on a suspicion only, has not even begun to repent, nor has he begun any research into discovering his own sins. Many and various things can be said; but in the end, only one thing is opportune, significant and outstanding: our salvation, which we do not attend to forever. Salvation is not attained, except only through sincere repentance and clean confession. Repentance not only opens the celestial Paradise, but also the terrestrial one, with the foretasting -albeit partial- of the ineffable joy of the endless reign of the heavens and of wonderful peace, in the present time.

Those who uphold the practice of confession can be the truly and genuinely happy people; pacifist and peace-bearing; heralds of repentance, of resurrection, of transformation, freedom, grace, and with the blessing of God in their souls and their lives. "God's bounteous Grace turns the wolf into a lamb", says Saint John the Chrysostom. No sin can surpass God's love. There is not one sinner who cannot become a saint, if he desires to. It has been proven, by the innumerable names that are recorded in the Book of Saints. The confessor listens to confessions and absolves those confessing, under his blessed stole. He cannot however confess himself and place the stole over his own head to obtain forgiveness in the same manner. He must necessarily kneel underneath another stole to confess and be absolved. That is the way the spiritual law functions; that is the way God's Wisdom and Mercy have ordained. We cannot confess others, but not submit ourselves to confession; to not practice what we preach; to talk about repentance, but not to repent; to talk about confession, but not confess ourselves regularly. None of us can dethrone himself, and none can absolve himself. The unadvised, the disobedient, the unconfessed are a serious problem for the Church. Dear brothers and sisters, the confessor's stole can be a miraculous scalpel for the removal of malignant tumors; it can raise the dead, renew and transform the indecorous world, and bring joy to earth and heaven. Our Church has entrusted this grand ministry, this sacred service, to our priests and not to the angels, so that we might be able to approach them with ease and without fear, as fellow-sufferers and corporeal counterparts. All the above have been deposited with sincerity and not at all pretentiously, by a co-sinner, who did not aspire to play the teacher, but a co-struggling, co-student, together with you. It was merely his desire to remind you with simple and inartistic words the Tradition of our holy mother, the Church, on the ever-opportune matter of divinely-spun and divinely-blessed Repentance and the divinely-delivered and God-favoured, blessed sacrament of Confession.

also: Body and blood of christ is not a symbol-Jesus told to His disciples:This is My Body,and not ''this is THE SYMBOL of my body''. This is My blood ,and not ''this is THE SYMBOL of my blood''.

Eucharist http://orthodoxwiki.org/Eucharist Eucharist (from the Greek ετφαπιςσία, or eucharistia, meaning thanksgiving or giving thanks) is a holy mystery (or sacrament) that is celebrated during the Divine Liturgy within the Orthodox Church where the consecrated bread and wine, through the power of the Holy Spirit becomes the Precious Blood and Body of Jesus Christ, that is consumed by prepared Orthodox Christians. Other names for the Eucharist include: the Holy Gifts, Communion, and the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ Orthodox Christians believe that the Real Presence of God (not merely a sign) is present after the consecration of the Gifts. Roman Catholics and some protestants also hold this view. The Eucharist is the center of life in the Orthodox Church because the Church is primarily a eucharistic community. The Eucharist is the completion of all of the Church's other sacraments and the source and the goal of all of the Church's doctrines and institutions. The majority of scholars of the Last Supper do not believe that it was a Passover meal, a position consistent with the account given by the Gospel of Saint John. A minority believe that it was a seder or Passover meal, a position consistent with the Synoptic gospels. However, as Enrico Mazza has argued, the minority view "remains a theological interpretation. The historical fact is that the Last Supper was not a Passover celebration and, consequently, that its liturgy was not that of the Jewish Passover" (The Celebration of the Eucharist: The Origin of the Rite and the Development of Its Interpretation [Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1999] pp. 25-26). The Orthodox Church uses leavened bread for, according to the Gospel of Saint John, Last Supper and Passion, took place during the evening, night and day time of Passover Day, therefore leavened bread was eaten in Last Supper. According to the synoptic Gospels, last Supper, Lord's trial and crucifixion took place during next day, the first Day of Unleavened Bread feast, but according to Lev 23:7, any work on that Day was forbidden. Clearly, the synoptic Gospels are in error on the day of Last Supper and Passion. For the remission of sins and unto life everlasting Before the reception of Holy Communion the following prayer is generally recited by all. It is each person's act of personal commitment to Christ, their promise of faith in Him and the Sacred Mysteries of His Church. I believe, O Lord, and I confess that Thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the Living God,

who camest into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first (see 1 Tim 1:15). I believe also that this is truly Thine own most pure Body, and that this is truly Thine own most precious Blood. Therefore I pray Thee: Have mercy upon me and forgive me my transgressions, committed in word and deed, whether consciously or unconsciously. And make me worthy to partake without condemnation of Thy most pure Mysteries, for the remission of sins and unto life everlasting. Of Thy Mystical Supper, O Son of God, accept me today as a communicant. For I will not speak of Thy Mystery to Thine enemies, neither like Judas will I give Thee a kiss; but like the thief will I confess Thee: "Remember me, O Lord, in Thy Kingdom." May the communion of Thy Holy Mysteries be neither to my judgment, nor to my condemnation, 0 Lord, but to the healing of soul and body. The faithful receive Holy Communion on a spoon. They are given both the consecrated bread (NIKA) and the sanctified wine. The communion of the faithful is always from the gifts offered and sanctified at the given Divine Liturgy. All who are prepared members of the Church through the sacraments of baptism and chrismation, including small children and infants, may partake of Holy Communion. Eucharist as a sacrifice The Orthodox Church believes the Eucharist to be a sacrifice. As is heard in the Liturgy, "Thine of Thine own we offer to Thee, in all and for all." At the Eucharist, the sacrifice offered is Christ himself, and it is Christ himself who in the Church performs the act of offering: He is both priest and victim. We offer to Thee. The Eucharist is offered to God the Trinity — not just to the Father but also to the Holy Spirit and to Christ Himself. So, what is the sacrifice of the Eucharist? By whom is it offered? and to whom is it offered? In each case the answer is Christ. We offer for all: according to Orthodox theology, the Eucharist is a propitiatory sacrifice, offered on behalf of both the living and the dead. The Church teaches that the sacrifice is not a mere figure or symbol but a true sacrifice. It is not the bread that is sacrificed, but the very Body of Christ. And, the Lamb of God was sacrificed only once, for all time. The sacrifice at the Eucharist consists, not in the real and bloody immolation of the Lamb, but in the transformation of the bread into the sacrificed Lamb. All the events of Christ's sacrifice, the Incarnation, the Last Supper, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, and the Ascension are not repeated in the Eucharist, but they are made present.

Real, symbolic, or mystical The Eucharist is both symbolic and mystical. Also, the Eucharist in the Orthodox Church is understood to be the genuine Body and Blood of Christ, precisely because bread and wine are the mysteries and symbols of God's true and genuine presence and his manifestation to us in Christ. The mystery of the Holy Eucharist defies analysis and explanation in purely rational and logical terms. For the Eucharist, as Christ himself, is a mystery of the Kingdom of Heaven which, as Jesus has told us, is "not of this world." The Eucharist, because it belongs to God's Kingdom, is truly free from the earth-born "logic" of fallen humanity. From John of Damascus: "If you enquire how this happens, it is enough for you to learn that it is through the Holy Spirit ... we know nothing more than this, that the word of God is true, active, and omnipotent, but in its manner of operation unsearchable". Reserved Sacrament The Eucharist is normally reserved in a tabernacle on the altar table, although there is no strict rule as to the place of reservation. There are no services of public devotion before the reserved sacrament, nor is there any equivalent to the Roman Catholic functions of Exposition and Benediction. The priest blesses the people with the sacrament during the course of the Liturgy, but never outside it. The faithful at the liturgy are never given communion from the reserved gifts; they are kept exclusively for those unable to be attend liturgy for good reasons, usually sickness or infirmity. Holy Communion is always from the gifts, the bread and wine, actually offered at the eucharistic liturgy which is currently being celebrated. Only the Liturgy of Presanctified Gifts uses gifts sanctified at the previous Divine Liturgy. The reserved gifts are normally prepared at the Vesperal Liturgy of Holy Thursday or when the need arises. A detailed description of this can be found in the addendum of the clergy service book.

also: Is Christmas stolen from the Pagans? (The pagan origins of Christmas debunked by a ...Pagan" Source: www.alastairadversaria.wordpress.com Read a thorough debunking of this old chestnut here, on a pagan forum, of all places (the claims to which the writer is responding are in bold).

First of all, based on a more careful reading of the Nativity stories, as found in the New Testament, it is very unlikely that the historical Jesus was born in December to begin with (winters in Judea tend to be very cold, and shepherds are described as tending their sheep in the fields; the two definitely don‘t go together). Had you expanded your careful reading a little bit, you‘d be aware that Christmas is ―the Feast of the Nativity,‖ not ―Jesus‘s Birthday.‖ While modern fundamentalists typically claim it‘s Jesus‘s ACTUAL birthday because they‘re theologically and historically ignorant, mainline denominations have never so claimed. It is well known that the Romans celebrated Saturnalia around the 25th, while in later centuries it was the holiday of the Unconquered Sun (Sol Invictus), the chief holiday of one of the most important cults of the late Empire (one held in special regard by such emperors as Constantine and Julian ―the Apostate‖ and also one extremely popular among the Roman soldiers who spread the cult, along with Mithraism all over the Empire). This fails to take into account movement of the dates relative to the solar year and relative to the calendar due to adjustments to the Julian calendar, the creation of leap-year and 10-day readjustment in the middle ages, and the switch from Julian to Gregorian calendars. But it would be a really nice argument if it were true! Christmas used to be somewhat different in date-relationship to Saturnalia and the solstice. (Also, you‘ve failed to provide any support whatsoever for the assertion that coincidence in time equals shared origins.) The pagans of northern Europe celebrated (and continue to celebrate) Yule at that time, long before Jesus was born and most of present-day Christmas customs, including carols, Christmas tree etc. have, beyond any doubt, origins in Celtic or Germanic winter solstice customs. Here again we have a ―yes, but.‖ You‘ve failed to provide an important connecting point: Did Christians have contact with northern Europeans at the time of the setting of the date for Christmas? In fact, no. Christmas was set near the date of Yule before Christians were evangelizing northern Europeans or, according to extant evidence, had any meaningful contact with that culture. (And again, you‘ve failed to provide support for the assertion that coincidence in time equals shared origins.)

Furthermore, the ―present-day Christmas customs‖ you cite are NOT universal Christmas customs by any stretch of the imagination. They are NORTHERN EUROPEAN Christmas customs. Christianity has always engaged in what‘s called ―inculturation‖ in theological jargon – the acceptance of aspects of local culture into church customs. For example, in Hawai‘i, hula is used in church celebrations because of its importance in local culture. Others can talk about carols better, but carols-qua-carols didn‘t appear until the middle ages, so I‘m not really sure how you‘re claiming Northern European pagans fit into that. Many Christian hymns are set to older tunes, but again, that was common cultural custom. And most of the tunes are medieval themselves. As for trees, I have a terrifically boring revelation for you: Since the second century, churches (formal separate buildings or informal house churches) were ―required‖ (in quotes because the authority structure was quite informal until the 10th century or so) to have green plants in the church as an expression of creation and new life. For all services, not just special ones. You can go into any Catholic Church today for a service and there will always be plants except on Good Friday. (And if not, they ought to be reported to the bishop; it‘s liturgical law and they‘re breaking it.) If you‘re in Northern Europe, and it‘s late December, and you‘re required to have greenery in your church, what are you going to use? Oh, right – fir trees, evergreen boughs, and holly. Which is probably, more or less, the same theological justification for their use in pagan winter celebrations. The reason Christmas trees are so popular as a symbol of the season is because Hallmark is a company coming out of a Northern European-derived culture that maintains those Christmas traditions. Prior to 1950, Italians would have looked at you like you had two heads if you tried to give them Christmas trees. (Well, there are evergreens in Italy too and some were used as Christmas decor, but not exclusively because there‘s other greenery available during that season, so there‘s not the same strong association of Christmas with firs. Lots of cultures prefer Christmas lilies. In Northern Europe, lilies had to be confined to Easter.) It wasn‘t until 350 CE that the Church of Rome declared December 25 as the day of

―Christ‘s‖ birth, in order to ease the process of converting pagans to this new religion. The same process is clearly visible in Easter and other main Christian holidays. So rather than being Christian holidays with added pagan symbolism, it is more accurate to say that they are Christianized pagan holidays. brilliant! You‘ve hit all my favorite calendrical myths in one paragraph! Point the first: Easter is not set according to any Pagan date, which should be immediately obvious to even the most casual observer. Easter is set according to THE DATE OF PASSOVER because Jesus‘s crucifixion coincided with Passover. Prior to the 9th century, Jews (who use a luni-solar calendar; that is, a lunar calendar with solar corrections so it doesn‘t ―march backwards‖ around the year the way the Islamic calendar does, because several Jewish feasts are agricultural in nature and that‘s silly when it turns up in the wrong season) set the date of Passover and certain other important dates, including beginnings of months, based on actual physical sightings of the moon (as Muslims still do today). (The reasons Jews went to an astronomical calendar in the 9th and 10th centuries – it was a process, not an event – has largely to do with the diaspora and slow communication that made it difficult for one rabbi to tell ALL the Jews when to start the month.) For Christians, this presented a problem after their asses were booted from the Temple prior to its destruction in 70ish CE. (There‘s some debate but it doesn‘t actually matter for our purposes.) As Christianity became more and more Gentile, and diverged from Judaism even in areas where Jewish Christians were the norm, they had to find their own way of setting the date of Easter, since the Jewish authorities were no longer willing to ―share‖ the calendar-setting info with the apostates, and the Gentiles were ever-farther away from Jerusalem. The debate began almost as soon as Christ‘s death, and by 180 AD there were two firm camps: one that wanted the date always to fall on Nisan 14, which could be any day of the week, and one that wanted the date to always fall on the Sunday closest to Nisan 14. There‘s an important theological point to this, which has to do with the Saturday Sabbath as the seventh day, and Sunday as the first. Since Jesus was arose on a Sunday and this made a ―new‖ Creation, Sunday became both the 8th day (fruition of God‘s plan in Creation) and the 1st day (new Creation). Weekly Sunday celebrations were conceived as ―little Easters‖ – smaller celebrations on every 1st/8th day of the week to commemorate the resurrection and new creation and fulfillment of God‘s promises. So to put Easter on a NOT-Sunday, argued one side of the debate, was to reject this

important theological point. But to put it on NOT-Nisan 14, argued the other side, was to reject the actual commemoration of the historical date. By the third century, Christian/Jewish relations were getting relatively ugly, and Sunday won out. Different systems developed, but the one that eventually was adopted for setting the date of Easter so that it would be near Passover and universal across a church that could take a long time to communicate, but didn‘t require Jewish assistance in sighting the moon, was to set Easter for the first Sunday after the first (astronomical) full moon after the spring equinox. This is basically how the Jewish luni-solar calendar corrects itself, using the equinoxes, so this puts Easter within a week of Passover. According to their calculations on the Julian calendar, early Church calendar obsessives thought that Jesus was crucified on March 25. (Tertullian, who was notably bad at calendar math and was in fact wrong, was the first to say so, although it‘s clear the date of March 25 was important to Christians prior to that because of earlier extant texts and Tertullian‘s obsession with fitting the calendar to that date.) This must mean, they decided round about AD 220, that because Jesus was in all way perfect, his life began on the same date. So they set the date for Jesus‘s conception on March 25. Which means that his BIRTH, because Jesus is in all ways perfect, had to be EXACTLY nine months after the conception. (These are already celibate monks. Nine months is as good an approximation for a ―perfect‖ pregnancy duration as we‘re going to get from them.) This put the celebration of Jesus‘s birth on Dec. 25. (Early authorities, incidentally, suggest the actual physical date of Jesus‘s birth was around 25 Pachon/20 May in 28 Augustus. But Jesus was a nobody in a backwater, so who was really keeping track?) Although, in point of fact, the earlier celebration is Epiphany, dating back at least to the 2nd century and extant texts suggest even earlier, which celebrates the revelation of Christ to the magi. We‘re not entirely clear why Epiphany was January 6, but it wasn‘t until your magic date of 350 CE that Christmas was broken out from the earlier and holier date of Epiphany. The 25th – 12 days before the 6th – was chosen for a variety of reasons, including that it was 9 months after Tertullian‘s magic date March 25 (now firmly the Feast of the Annunciation), and that it beautifully fit with the happy number of 12 (apostles, etc.). However, the elements of the Christmas liturgies existed in the Epiphany liturgies long before the 350 CE breakout. Finally, to reiterate, Christmas is NOT ―Jesus‘s Birthday.‖ It is ―The Feast of the Nativity.‖ Feasts mean we CELEBRATE it on that day, not that we believe it actually HAPPENED on

that day. (Otherwise ―The Feast of St. Thomas More‖ would be quite silly, because how could he himself occur entirely on that day?) So, to sum up: Christian calendar dates based on Jewish calendar dates, quasi-mystical beliefs about perfection, and sometimes crappy math. Easter is the earliest celebration, and the setting of its date has zero relationship to anything but Jewish celebrations (and again, if you have done a ―careful reading,‖ this should be utterly obvious). Most other early Christian calendar dates are based off Easter, with the exception of the mysterious date-preference of Epiphany. (Moreover, in terms of importance of the holidays, it goes Easter, Epiphany, Lent, THEN Christmas. Christmas is low man on the liturgical totem pole.) To cut a long story short, neither is it Christ‘s actual birthday, nor the customs have anything to do with Jesus or Christian doctrine. Everything about is far more pagan than it could ever be Christian, which is, again, why I don‘t have any problems with celebrating it. And to sum up the entire post, your assertions are wrong in almost all particulars. It appears to me that you have a particular bias – that Christianity is Pagan-derived – and that you have set out to only consider evidence that proves your belief. A truly careful examination of extant evidence would have shown you how baseless your assertions are. Even a cursory examination of the Bible and a glance at the modern calendar might have clued you in to Easter‘s dating basis, so your assertion that Easter‘s date is Pagan-based leads me to conclude that you‘ve looked at evidence with serious blinders on that only allowed you to consider things that proved your biases. Finally, your last sentence is UNBELIEVABLY rude and presumptuous. Would you like it if a Christian walked into your holy day and said, ―Well, everything here is obviously Christian-derived, even if you‘re too stupid to know it.‖? Why do you feel comfortable being so dismissive about my holy day, and being so rude about my level of intellect? Do you really feel comfortable telling a billion and a half Christians that they‘re ACTUALLY celebrating a Pagan holiday and just haven‘t noticed? Or do you think it‘s remotely possible that EVEN IF any of your assertions had been remotely based in fact and Christmas WERE a Pagan-derived holiday, that those billion and a half Christians were actually managing to celebrate a holy event of their faith, regardless of date? Does it please you when fundamentalists inform you that even if you don‘t know it,

you‘re actually worshipping Satan? Why, then, do you feel it‘s okay to tell me that even if I don‘t know it, I‘m celebrating a Pagan holiday? Bad form. Very bad form. ************************* You might also be interested to read William Tighe‘s more detailed treatment of the dating question, in which he concludes: Thus, December 25th as the date of the Christ‘s birth appears to owe nothing whatsoever to pagan influences upon the practice of the Church during or after Constantine‘s time. It is wholly unlikely to have been the actual date of Christ‘s birth, but it arose entirely from the efforts of early Latin Christians to determine the historical date of Christ‘s death. And the pagan feast which the Emperor Aurelian instituted on that date in the year 274 was not only an effort to use the winter solstice to make a political statement, but also almost certainly an attempt to give a pagan significance to a date already of importance to Roman Christians. The Christians, in turn, could at a later date re-appropriate the pagan ―Birth of the Unconquered Sun‖ to refer, on the occasion of the birth of Christ, to the rising of the ―Sun of Salvation‖ or the ―Sun of Justice.‖ The ‗truthiness‘ of the ‗Christians stole Christmas from the pagans‘ meme to Zeitgeist fans (or to Christian fundamentalists who are leery of the corruptions of Scripture by Church ‗tradition‘) notwithstanding, most claims rapidly unravel upon closer examination. Almost all of these debates about the ‗real meaning of Christmas‘ seem to rely on the suspect assumption that the origins of a particular tradition or practice have some privileged claim upon its ‗meaning‘ (and the idea that a feast such as Christmas is best understood in terms of what is generally meant by ‗meaning‘ sounds fishy to me). I don‘t see any reason why the ‗meaning‘ of Christmas or any other such feast need be regarded as any more fixed and unchanging than the meanings of words. While there may be good reasons for seeking to preserve certain meanings, the original use of a word does not set in stone its meaning for all time. Within contemporary Western society, Christmas means more, but considerably less, than the ‗meaning‘ Christians find in the feast. The ‗real meaning‘ of Christmas in contemporary Britain is shaped by commercialism, pop culture, British and Western European cultural traditions, and many other forces besides Christianity. I don‘t believe

that we can maintain that Christians have some exclusive claim upon its celebration. Rather than seeking bland acknowledgements of the rightfulness of our claim from an indifferent society, we are better off enjoying the celebration for what it is, while maintaining the peculiar and unique place that the celebration holds in the lives of Christians.

The true nature of water has its destiny in the salvation of man and the world. The blessing of waters doesn't "make bad water good." It restores the water to its original state. The prayer at the blessing of water causes the revelation of the true "nature" and "purpose" of water, and thus of the world. By being restored through the blessing to its proper function, water becomes again a means of communion with God. Christ in His Baptism purified the nature of the waters. He came to save not only humanity but, through their transformation, all of Creation. During the blessing of the water a wonderful miracle is manifested. God the Holy Spirit, descending down upon the water, changes its natural properties. It again becomes incorrupt — remaining transformed and fresh for a very long time. Holy Water receives the grace of the Holy Spirit to heal illnesses, drive away demons, preserve and protect people and their homes, and sanctify the faithful and various objects whether for church or home use. Therefore, Orthodox Christians drink Holy Water with profound faith and reverence throughout the year. Among Orthodox Christians, Holy Water is used frequently in rites of blessing and exorcism, and the water of baptism is always sanctified with a special blessing that consists of prayers almost identical to those used on Epiphany. Over the centuries, there have been many springs of water believed to be miraculous, such as the Life-Giving Spring of the Theotokos in Constantinople. Orthodox do not bless themselves with Holy Water upon entering a temple as do Catholics, but in Orthodox monasteries there is often Holy Water and cups to to drink from at the entrance. The practice of Holy Water is based on the Baptism of our Lord Who was baptized by Saint John the Forerunner in the River Jordan. Jesus' Baptism is commemorated in the Orthodox Christian Church on the Great Feast of Lights (σων Φώσων), Theophany, or Epiphany (literally "manifestation of God") on January 6. Following the Blessing of the Waters, the priest distributes bottles of Holy Water for use by parishioners throughout the year.

Every Orthodox family should have Holy Water at home and utilize it in cases of illness, leaving on a trip, when a child is frightened by a bad dream, or if someone feels threatened by evil influence or presence. Students may partake of Holy Water before tests. Many partake simply to strengthen their faith and hope in God. Water is seen by the Church as a prime element of creation. In blessing water, it is asked that the original purpose of water — as a source of life, blessing and holiness — be revealed to one who drinks it. In Genesis in the Old Testament, creation began when the Spirit of God moved over the face of the waters. In the blessing of water it is understood that the world and everything in it is "very good" (Genesis 1:31), and when it becomes corrupted, God saves it once more by effecting the new creation in Christ, His Divine Son and Our Lord, by the grace of the Holy Spirit. The celebration of the Great Blessing of Water is an affirmation that through Christ's Own Baptism, He has lifted the curse of Adam's sin and given the creative goodness of God's creation back to mankind once again. Thus when Christians are baptized into Christ, part of creation is once again sanctified in Christ. In the weeks following Epiphany, the priest customarily visits parishioners and offers prayers of blessing for their homes, businesses, and family members. This tradition is meant to visibly represent God's sanctifying work everywhere in the world and to bring the blessing of the Church to the ―church‖ of the home and hearth.

Old Testament - Exodus Indeed, incense is referred to frequently throughout both the Old and the New Testaments. In both the Old and the New Testaments, smoke from the incense is symbolic of the prayers of the faithful rising up to heaven; e.g.: Let my prayer be incense before you; my uplifted hands an evening sacrifice.

(Psalm

141:2) Smoke from incense in various Jewish and Christian liturgies also serves as a further reminder to the faithful of the presence of God as He manifested Himself in various theophanies throughout salvation history; e.g.: Mount Sinai was all wrapped in smoke, for the Lord came down upon it in fire. The

smoke rose from it as though from a furnace, and the whole mountain trembled violently.

(Exodus 19:18)

In particular, Exodus 30:1-10 and Exodus 30:34-38 provide wonderful details that the Lord gave Moses for both constructing the altar of incense, and how to prepare the incense itself; e.g.: On it Aaron shall burn fragrant incense. Morning after morning, when he prepares the lamps, and again in the evening twilight, when he lights the lamps, he shall burn incense. Throughout your generations this shall be the established incense offering before the Lord. On this altar you shall not offer up any profane incense... (Exodus 30:7-9) Of note is the admonition the Lord gives Moses not to use incense for profane purposes. The Lord again leaves Moses with similar admonitions regarding the proper preparation and use of the incense itself; i.e. This incense shall be treated as most sacred by you. You may not make incense of a like mixture for yourselves; you must treat it as sacred to the Lord. Whoever makes an incense like this for his own enjoyment of its fragrance, shall be cut off from his kinsmen.

(Exodus 30:36-37)

Old Testament - Prophets Recalling God's commands to Moses, prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Hosea would later chastise the Israelites sternly for burning incense in a profane manner to false gods such as Baal, Ashtarte, Moloch, Chemosh, etc. rather than keeping it sacred and dedicated to God alone; e.g.: Are you to steal and murder, commit adultery and perjury, burn incense to Baal, go after strange gods that you know not, and yet come to stand before me in this house which bears my name, and say: "We are safe; we can commit all these abominations again"?

(Jeremiah 7:9-10)

Smoke from incense during liturgical services (e.g. while singing the Sanctus at mass) also calls to mind other theophanies such as the prophet Isaiah's in which smoke accompanied the presence of God. i.e.:

"Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts!" they cried one to the other. "All the earth is filled with his glory!" At the sound of that cry, the frame of the door shook and the house was filled with smoke. (Isaiah 6:3-4) New Testament In several places, the New Testament also continues to draw our attention to the proper role incense plays as representative of the prayers of the faithful rising to heaven. A few examples are listed below. Luke: Once when he [Zechariah] was serving as priest in his division's turn before God, according to the practice of the priestly service, he was chosen by lot to enter the sanctuary of the Lord to burn incense. Then, when the whole assembly of the people was praying outside at the hour of the incense offering, the angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right of the altar of incense.

(Luke 1:8-11)

Hebrews: Now [even] the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly sanctuary. For a tabernacle was constructed, the outer one, in which were the lamp-stand, the table, and the bread of offering; this is called the Holy Place. Behind the second veil was the tabernacle called the Holy of Holies, in which were the gold altar of incense and the ark of the covenant entirely covered with gold.

(Hebrews 9:1-4)

Revelation: He came and received the scroll from the right hand of the one who sat on the throne. When he took it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the holy ones.

(Revelation 5:6-8)

REFERENCES Confraternity of Christian Doctrine. The New American Bible, (Iowa Falls: IA, World Bible Publishers, Inc. 1991) The Holy Cross

However, history shows that Roman public executions during the time of Jesus used crosses, not stakes. Stakes and tree stumps were used in battlefields to execute enemy soldiers and field officers. For public executions, condemned persons were hung from crosses with small signs over their heads that described their crimes. This was described clearly by the early historians and writers of that day. The scripture quoted above uses the phrase "torture stake" in the Watchtower's New World Translation. However, the more widely accepted New International Version translates that this way: "32 As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross. 33 They came to a place called Golgotha (which means "the place of the skull"). 34 There they offered Jesus wine to drink, mixed with gall; but after tasting it, he refused to drink it. 35 When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by casting lots. 36 And sitting down, they kept watch over him there. 37 Above his head they placed the written charge against him: THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS." If Jesus' hands were nailed above his head, as on a stake, then where would the sign have been nailed? Then the text would have said "Above his hands..." (Of course, this would still be above his head.) The Watchtower's position is indefensible from an historic view, but again, they can teach and believe whatever they want. However, the "Cross and the Crown" was on the cover of all Watchtower magazines from the time of C.T. Russell until the late 1920's, so obviously the early Bible Students believed in Jesus's death on a cross. After doing research and praying extensively for Jehovah's holy spirit to guide him, the then president, J.F. Rutherford decided to change the teaching to further isolate Jehovah's Witnesses from other Christian religions.

THE CROSS AND THE ''WITNESSES OF JEHOVAH'' Until 1932 the organization believed and worshiped the Holy Cross, but then it was changed (it) provided that:'' torture wood'' Of course,you do not accept the saints, so we can not quote Great.Constantine and'' (En touto nika, "In this, be victorious"). However,you accept John the Theologian, after you reading the Scriptures, even counterfeit (N.W.T.). You should not overlook that the saint with the shape of the Holy Cross defeated the

magician kynopa to island Patmos. Also, Moses opened the Red Sea with the shape of the Holy Cross, opened horizontally and vertically closed. In the Bible it mentions the word ''Cross'' 36 times, but with the intervention of N.W.T. has been changed to'' timber'' and instead of crucifixion has become ''hang''! Indeed, the''organization'' consider that is idolatry and sexual (!) Symbol... So after the Cross,they also changed holidays (while by 1930-32 celebrates Christmas-Easter, etc) as now they considered as idolatrous feasts! (What happened until 1932 so, 1899 years after the crucifixion(!) so many changes and innovations to come from... America)? a...NEW LIGHT Obviously...? Thus, the J W's, have only a feast now, the'' MEMORY'' of Death of Jesus,'' the greatest man who ever lived''! Resurrection is not celebrated ... After you blame the Orthodox Christians as idolaters for honouring of the Holy Icons, How does your magazines of the ''Watchtower'' appears Jesus Christ on the covers and inside? Appears in neat beard, shorn, as if it has come out of the hairdresser. Where do you know how was the figure of Christ,after you have no apostolic succession,and not accept the Sacred tradition? (Even with the advent of Jesus Christ, which is not the most important thing), other things which are redemptive and dogmatically that your have lost,after having no connection with the ancient Church. Your only issue is the fact that we honour the icons? ''Honouring the original face'',not the wood,colours,etc, have you heard? When you embrace your father, your mother, your child, and generally, someone who leaving for a trip? can convert (from love, honouring) The photo of your dead ones, but not the picture of Christ and the apostles of whom you read their Scriptures? The Bible, both the Old and the New Testament is full of worship, honorary. Did you know that the Jewish Talmud accused (as well as some Jewish sects) Christians as idolaters? There is even a whole chapter given in the Talmud, called'' Abodah Zarah''. Which means worshipers of Idol - pagans, so we appreciate from where the sources of heresy originates... As the adoption of the Jewish rule in the Bible, with the 39 books of the Old Testament ie the Masoretic, instead of the Christian rule of the Scriptures, who is the

oldest and translated from the Septuagint, and are complete with the 49 books -something that was not convenient to the Watchtower after it demonstrates the prophecies about the expected Messiah, concerning the existence of the soul, and divinity of Christ. Worship of Jesus is OK? 1879 "His position is contrasted with men and angels, as he is Lord of both, having 'all power in heaven and earth'. Hence it is said, 'Let all of the angels of God worship him' [that must included Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because he has 'by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.'" (C.T. Russell, Watchtower Nov. 1879, bracketed comment in the original) 1880 "He was the object of unreproved worship even when a babe, by the wise men who came to see the new-born king... He never reproved any for acts of worship offered to Himself... Had Christ not been more than man the same reason would have prevented Him from receiving worship." (Watchtower Reprints, 1, Oct., 1880, p. 144). 1898 "Question... Was he really worshipped, or is the translation faulty? Answer. Yes, we believe our Lord while on earth was really worshipped, and properly so... It was proper for our Lord to receive worship..." (Watchtower Reprints, 111, July 15, 1898, p. 2337). 1915 "As the special messenger of the Covenant, whom the Father had sanctified and sent into the world to redeem the world, and whom the Father honored in every manner, testifying, 'This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased' - it was eminently proper that all who beheld his glory, as the glory of an Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, should reverence him, hear him, obey him, and worship him - do him homage - as the representative of the Father." (At-One-Ment Between God And Man, 1899; 1915 ed.; p. 134) 1945 "Since Jehovah God now reigns as King by means of his capital organization Zion, then whosoever would worship him must also bow down to Jehovah's Chief One in that organization, namely Christ Jesus, his co-regent on the throne of The Theocracy." (Watchtower, Oct 15, 1945) 1945 "The purposes of this Society are: ... public Christian worship of Almighty God and Jesus Christ; to arrange for and hold local and world-wide assemblies for such

worship..." (Charter of the Watchtower Society of Pennsylvania, Article II, Feb 27, 1945 [the 1969 Yearbook quotes Article II of the Charter, "and for public Christian worship of Almighty God...." leaving off the original requirement to worship Jesus]) 1970 "But when He again brings his First-born into the inhabited earth, he says: 'And let all God's angels worship him' Hebrews 1:6." (New World Translation, 1950, 1961, 1970 editions, [The NWT revised 1971 edition was changed to read, "do obeisance to" rather than "worship"]) Jesus crucified on a cross not a stake? 1927 Picture of Christ on a cross. (Creation; 1927; 2,175,000 ed.; p. 265) 1927 Picture of Christ on a cross. (Creation; 1927; 2,175,000 ed.; p. 336) 1928 Picture of Christ on a cross. (The Harp of God; 1921; 1928 ed.; p. 113) 1929 Picture of Christ carrying a cross. (Life; 1929; 1,000,000 ed.; p. 198) 1929 "Jesus was crucified upon the cross; but it is a well-known fact that, contrary to the custom in respect to the victims of crucifixion, not one bone of his body was broken." (Life; 1929; 1,000,000 ed.; p. 216) Jesus never really raised from the dead? The disciples didn't steal the dead body of Jesus (Matt 28:11-15) as the Jews charged, Jehovah did??? 1915 "Our Lord's human body was, however, supernaturally removed from the tomb; because had it remained there it would have been an insurmountable obstacle to the faith of the disciples, who were not yet instructed in spiritual things - for "the spirit was not yet given." (John 7:39) We know nothing about what became of it, except that it did not decay or corrupt. (Acts 2:27,31) Whether it was dissolved into gasses or whether it is still preserved somewhere as the grand memorial of God's love, of Christ's obedience, and of our redemption, no one knows; - nor is such knowledge necessary." (The Time Is At Hand; 1889; 1915 ed.; p. 129) 1928 "Our Lord's human body, the one crucified, was removed from the tomb by the power of God. Had it remained there it would have been an obstacle in the way of the faith of his disciples, who were not yet instructed in spiritual things. They were not thus instructed until the giving of the holy spirit at Pentecost. The scriptures do not reveal what became of that body, except that it did not decay or corrupt. (Acts 2:27-31) We can only surmise that the Lord may have preserved it somewhere to exhibit to the people of the millennial age." (The Harp Of God, 1921; 1928 ed.; p. 172)

Let's use the N.W.T. itself, to prove the truth, the Cross of the Lord ... We read (page 1353): (John 20:25) '' 25Consequently the other disciples would say to him: ―We have seen the Lord!‖ But he said to them: ―Unless I see in HIS HANDS THE PRINT OF THE N A I L S and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will certainly not believe". HERE it SPEAKS FOR NAILS IN HANDS'' and not''torture stake'' as the N.W.T. claiming! Let us see another point (Always through the N.W.T.) Matthew 27: 37 ''Also, they posted ABOVE HIS HEAD the charge against him, in writing: ―This is Jesus the King of the Jews''.‖ Here, we see again the shape of the Cross which ''shudder and tremble for, not bearing his force'' the Lord of the Watchtower (and of this world) ...

Moreover, If you do not believe the words of the Apostles,the proof will come from...him (that creates the heresies)! What does Lucifer wants to his black ceremonies? Hitch ... CROSS! To desecrate-exactly what he does by creating schisms and heresies ... So the question arises: They could not tempering its meaning; (which is impossible) or it is eluded by the translators? In N.W.T. and specifically on page 1660 states:'' Jesus Christ hung on a wood execution as a disgrace'', and'' Jesus Christ hung on a pole or execution tree'', and'' Christians must have the wood as a disgrace '' You see,'' that the Main leader of the sect and persecutor of the Cross, the ''ruler of this world'' ...dont want to hear this word! "Lord, You have given us Your Cross as a weapon against the Devil; for he shudders and trembles, not being able to gaze upon its might. The Holy Cross of Christ becomes a standard and a measure of either man's triumph or his condemnation, depending upon the position he takes vis-a-vis it. Whoever equates Christ's Cross with that of the thieves, is equated with the unrepentant thief and is condemned. On the contrary, whoever differentiates the Cross of Christ and considers it to be a royal scepter, and invokes the mercy of Christ, is likened unto the good thief, and the road leading to Paradise is opened up before him. In this way the Holy Cross becomes the measure of the judgment of the world, "the scale of justice" as it is called by the hymn of the Church.

Archaeological Evidence Michael Green has observed the following: Some experts doubt whether the cross became a Christian symbol so early, but the recent discoveries of the cross, the fish, the star, and the plough, all well known from the second century, on ossuaries of the Judaeo-Christian community in Judae put the possibility beyond all reasonable cavil." (Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church, pp. 214-215). In June of 1968 1st century tombs were accidently unearthed by bulldozers working north of Jerusalem. Archaeologist, Vasilius Tzaferis excavated the tombs and unearthed the skeletal remains of a young man who had been crucified. Mr Tzaferis, who is not a Christian, wrote an article on his findings in the Biblical Archaeological Review. Writing of what he discovered, part of the Review states: It is interesting to know that in a similar way to Jehovah's Witnesses, there are some who have previously believed that Christ died on a torture stake rather than the cross, but then have changed their position. This has been seen most notably with the Worldwide Church of God, publishers of the magazine The Plain Truth. This group used to believed that Christ was crucified on an upright pole or torture stake. However this position has been abandoned in recent times in favour of the traditional belief that the implement of crucifixion was a cross. It has been my own observation, as I have observed the behaviour of, and talked with Jehovah's Witnesses over the years, that many have an almost superstitious dread and fear of the cross shape. So convinced are they, of what the Watchtower has told them regarding this image, that many instantly associate it with paganism. This is most unfortunate because, as was seen, the evidence seems to clearly be in favour of this shape. When Christians use the cross of Christ in their decorations of churches etc. they use it as a symbol of victory over the forces of paganism. It also reminds Christians of the suffering which Christ endured for our sins. Some Witnesses may even think that Christians worship the cross. While there may be some individuals who may do this, this is certainly something which is not the norm in Christianity (particularly Protestant Christianity) and certainly something to be rejected, as indeed it is by the vast majority of Christendom. Some may object that it is not important what shape the structure was upon which Christ was crucified, but rather what happened there. Christians would certainly agree with this. Certainly, theologians and scholars have no doubt pondered on the shape of

the implement of crucifixion, but it has never been an issue of primary concern. However, it should be remembered that it was not the Christian Church who began to attack the shape of the cross, and reject it as a pagan symbol, but rather the Watchtower Society. Christians are simply defending a symbol which reminds them of an event which is important to them. also: ''The sign of the Cross and the Orthodox Prayer has the ability to neutralize germs, as Russian scientists claim. Moscow, March 17, 2006, agency Interfax - Scientists claim to have demonstrated experimentally the miraculous properties of the sign of the Cross and Prayer. "We have verified that the old custom of" crossing "of food and drink before the meal contains a deep secret meaning. Behind him lies the practical result: food purged literally, in the blink of an eye. This is a great miracle which happens every day, "said physicist Angela Malachofskagia, in an article in the newspaper" ZIIZN "last Friday. Malachofskagia studying this power of the Cross with the blessing of the Church for ten years. She had already made a large number of experiments, which confirmed repeatedly, before the publication of her results. Specifically revealed the unique properties acquired water after the blessing of the Orthodox Prayer and the Type of the Cross. The study also revealed a new and previously unknown property of the Word of God to change the very structure of water, making it the largest optical density in the UV spectrum, the newspaper writes. Scientists have verified the effect of "Our Father" and the Orthodox sign of the Cross upon pathogenic bacteria. Used water samples from different vats - wells, rivers, lakes - for research. All samples had some form aureus - a coliform. It proved, however, that when pronounced the "Our Father" and printed the Sign of the Cross over the samples, the number of dangerous bacteria was reduced by seven, ten, a hundred, even a thousand times more. The experiments were performed in such a way as to preclude any possibility of autosuggestion. The prayer was pronounced by believers and non-believers, but the number of pathogenic bacteria in various environments with different groups of bacteria decreased again in relation to the reference data.

The scientists also demonstrated the beneficial effect of prayer and the sign of the Cross over the people. All participants in the experiments found a balance in blood pressure and blood markers to improve. This finding was not surprising that all indicators change according to the type of treatment that was necessary - the hypotensive observed rise in their blood pressure, while hypertensive reduced pressure. Also observed that if the sign of the cross was extemporaneous, without three fingers together or randomly placed outside of the essential points - the center of the forehead, the center of the solar plexus and the cavities of the right and left shoulder the positive result was significantly weaker or absent altogether''.

7) Question: Is the ''Organization of God'' infallible? If it is,so,why they had change four (4!) times the date of the Second Coming of Jesus? (1914-1918-1925-1975). Why they had change its doctrine of worship to Christ four times? Organization A highly centralized structure frames the whole organization. Orders and reports come from and move back to the Brooklyn headquarters, directly or through various levels of authority. In important countries branch offices supervise the work and channel the distribution of publications. Local congregations are visited regularly by district and circuit servants who meet local members. They keep detailed statistics of all activities. The Witnesses are brought together by conventions of all types. As to whether the Witnesses are a church, the has this to say: "In 1965 the group was gradually losing some of its specific characteristics as a sect. Although the Witnesses did not yet consider that they belonged to the society in which they lived, they had toned down their strong language against religious and civil institutions. Old Witnesses and neophytes remain extraordinarily active, but some have begun to show less fervor. Apparently the various social classes were also somewhat better represented among them than they were ten or twenty years earlier, when it was said that less than one per cent of the Witnesses had more than a high school

education. Thus, Jehovah's Witnesses appear to be taking on more and more of the characteristics of a church as opposed to a sect" (7:865). A real danger? A system that contradicts basic Christian ideals must be a danger. Particularly in countries like those of South America, where there is such a serious shortage of priests, great ignorance of religion, and much material distress, Jehovah's Witnesses represent a real menace. Their system is based on the destruction of Christianity, of all organized religion, and of all lawful civil authority. It is hard to imagine anything more false or more dangerous than that. The Witnesses claim that the Bible forbids blood transfusion. This is a highly dangerous doctrine. It is also quite wrong. Typical texts quoted by Witnesses are Leviticus 17:10,14 and Acts 15:29. Insofar as these texts refer to abstaining from blood, they are simply dietary rules which were obeyed by the Jewish people until the time of Christ. The apostles made a temporary rule that new Christians should abstain from blood, but it is clear that this was done as a compromise to pacify the Jewish Christians and to avoid giving scandal to them. It is stretching the meaning of these texts beyond all sense to make them forbid blood transfusions. It is one thing to drink the blood of an animal or to eat meat that has blood in it and quite a different thing to receive a blood transfusion. When a Witness calls If a Witness calls at your home, be charitable. Say quite frankly and definitely that you have your own fixed beliefs and you are quite satisfied with them. Generally speaking it is a waste of time to argue with the Witness on the doorstep. There can be little common ground between Catholics and Jehovah's Witnesses. For the latter such fundamental terms as God, Christ, Holy Spirit, Church, religion, and salvation have a meaning quite different from that which they have had for nearly twenty centuries for the Church and all her Fathers, Doctors, saints, and scholars. Remember too that your Witness visitor is almost certainly unreasonably prejudiced. Only those Catholics who are sufficiently qualified might hope to gain anything by discussion. They should always retain the initiative by talking about the Church as they

see it and not about the errors of the Witnesses. Remember that the poor Witness knows nothing of the beauties and treasures of the Church. The only hope in a discussion with him is to be positive, refuse to be drawn into an argument, and concentrate on passing on the picture of the faith that is in the true Catholic mind. Never accept or buy literature from the Witnesses. Never give them money. Never lose your temper or use insulting language. Remember that Witnesses do not always reveal themselves for what they are. If anyone comes to your house and asks, for example, if you are interested in the Bible, ask at once if he is a representative of the Witnesses of Jehovah. Then act accordingly. If the "organization" rigidly taught these to new converts 25 years ago as "God's unchanging truth," but reject them today as apostate, how can you trust what they rigidly teach you as "God's unchanging truth" today? Beware of "organization." It is wholly unnecessary. The Bible rules will be the only rules you will need. Do not seek to bind others' consciences, and do not permit others to bind yours. Believe and obey so far as you can understand God's Word today. (Watchtower Sept. 15, 1895, p. 216) First Version: "It is the duty of believers to worship Jesus Christ" ("Zion's Watch Tower", English edition, 15 July 1898). Second version: "Do not conclude that Christians should worship Christ.'s Not what he taught" ("Watchtower", English edition, 15 July 1959). Third version. In 1970 the revised version of the NWT (New World Translation) we read that Christ should be worshiped! Fourth (!) Version: The revision of 1971 (and 1984) of the NWT, we read that Christ is not worshiped! For years the company teaches that Christ died on a stake and in the "New World translation" the word ''Cross'' has been replaced with the term "torture stake". (As their...Master orders)? But until 1932 they wore the cross. Russell asked his followers to be soldiers of the Cross (see "Angel of Laodicea"), while in the brochures was the crucifix - emblem of the Masonic Knights Templar!

Also: God is not author of Confusion Ransom 1929: For all. (Book 'Life', p 207). 1937. Not for everyone. (Book 'Enemies' sel.126). Resurrection 1938: There will be during the 1000 year. (Face the Facts p 55). 1939: made during the 1000 year. (Salvation ', p 355 and Watchtower 15/12/1939, par.24). Restoration 1921: For all the people. ("The Guitar of God ', p 330). (First edition). 1934: Not for all the people. ('Jehovah', pp. 206). Broker 1928: The Church does not need brokers. ['Reconciliation' (Reconciliation), 171, 172, 161]. 1934: The Church needs Broker. ('Jehovah', pp. 206). Redemption of Adam 1929: Redemption by Christ. ('Life', pp. 207, 339). 1939: Not by Christ. ("Watchtower, 1939, p 149). The resourceful Nebuchadnezzar 1930: Represents Satan. ("FOS", sel.311-313). 1930: Represents God. ("Watchtower" 1930, pp. 131, 134, 137). The Testing of Jesus 1928: Jesus was tested and approved in the first advent. ("Government" page 104). 1930: Jesus will be tested at the second coming. ("Light", p 324). Return of Jesus He returned in 1874. ('Prophecy', page 65). He returned in 1914. ('Contestable I' p 287).

Great crowd 1933: Born of the Spirit. ('Preparation', page 164). 1936: Not Born in the Spirit ('Riches', 324) Developing Characters 1923: Work of God. (Watchtower, 1923, p 184). 1927: error of Satan. (Watchtower, 1927, pp. 195, 196, 201. 1925 In 1924, the Watchtower announced that all would end in 1925. (See The Watchtower 1924, sel.159). But in 1926, stated that 'others' were expecting that things would end in 1925. (See The Watchtower, 1926, p 232). Ancient worthies Be tested during the Millennium. (Watchtower, 1925, p 23). Be tested thoroughly before the Millennium. (Watchtower, 1926, p 87). Religion True religion was from God. ('Beyond the Grave', page 12). 1939: All religions were of Satan. ('Salvation', pp. 116).

"God is the editor of the Watchtower", Franz the president Jw's said under oath? 1940 Question to Franz from court: "Who subsequently became the Editor of the magazine, the main editor of the 'Watch Tower' magazine?" Franz's Answer: "Jehovah God." (Fred W. Franz on the witness stand under oath, New York King's County Clerks' Court Record, 1940, vol. II, p 795)

The 27 New Testament books not applicable to the average Jw! Weren't the 144,000 vacancies filled in the first century? Were there any vacancies in 1914? How do Jw's know how many vacancies? 1973 Anyone reading the Christian Greek Scriptures can readily see that, starting with Pentecost of 33 C.E., the hope held out to believers was of sharing with Jesus Christ in his kingdom rule in heaven. (True Peace And Security - From What Source; 1973; p. 67)

1976 Were those apostles and other Christian Bible writers setting before the baptized believers and earthly hope of becoming the children of the Eternal Father, Jesus Christ, and living on a paradise earth forever? No! They were setting before those to whom they preached and wrote the hope then of those begotten as children of God, the sons of Jehovah (Isaiah 9:6,7) In the inspired Christian writings the disciples of the day were assured that they had the calling to a kingdom that was heavenly and that their hope was that of being joint heirs with Jesus Christ above. (Holy Spirit, 1976; p. 129) 1977 In reading the Christian Greek Scriptures we observe that the hope held out to all those who accepted the preaching of Jesus and his apostles was that of sharing with Jesus Christ in his Kingdom rule in heaven. (Life Does Have a Purpose; 1977; p. 138) 1979 The new covenant will terminate with the glorification of the remnant who are today in that covenant mediated by Christ. The "great crowd" of "other sheep" that is forming today is not in that new covenant. However, by their associating with the "little flock" of those yet in that covenant they come under benefits that flow from that new covenant. (The Watchtower; April 1, 1979; p. 31) 1983 Special attention was being given to making up the government that would rule mankind for 1,000 years, and nearly all the inspired letters in the Christian Greek Scriptures are primarily directed to this group of kingdom heirs - "the holy ones," "partakers of the heavenly calling." (United In Worship of the Only True God; 1983; p. 111) 1986 anyone reading the christian Greek Scriptures can readily see that starting with Pentecost 33 C.E., others were being invited to share with Jesus Christ in his heavenly kingdom rule. (True Peace And Security; 1986; 33,000,000 ed.; p. 65) 1989 For a time after Jesus had inaugurated the "new and living way" to heavenly life, all Christians were being invited to share in that hope. (Watchtower, June 15, 1989; p. 6)

(Now go to Prophecy Blunder's of Jehovah's Witnesses to see how many times they falsely predicted Armageddon! Armageddon Prophecy Blunders Conscious life after death?

1915 "While the glorified members of the Kingdom beyond the vail are doing a work in shaping the current of present events and preparing for the glorious reign, those on this side of the vail have also an important work." (Thy Kingdom Come; 1891; 1915 ed.; p. 303) 1915 "Additionally, such should remember that they themselves, on the other side of the veil, will have still as good an opportunity of watching over the interests of their loved ones as they now have, and a much better opportunity than now to exercise a protecting care over them - a providential guidance in their affairs under divine wisdom, with which they will concur absolutely." (The New Creation; 1899; 1915 ed.; p. 555-556) 1936 "Now Satan knows that his time is very short until the great fight at Armageddon takes place, and he hastens to drive all men into spiritism or devilism and therefore against God; and for that reason at the present time there is a great turning to spiritism and spirit mediums throughout the land." (Riches; 1936; p. 101) 1988 "And in response one of the elders said to me: 'These who are dressed in the white robes, who are they and where did they come from?' So right away I said to him: 'My lord, you are the one that knows.' (Revelation 7:13, 14a) Yes, that elder could locate the answer and give it to John. This suggests that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today." (Revelation It's Grand Climax At Hand!; 1988; p. 125) Disfellowshiped for doubting the 1914 doctrine??? 1986 "Why have Jehovah's Witnesses disfellowshiped for apostasy some who still profess belief in God, the Bible and Jesus Christ? Approved association with Jehovah's Witnesses requires accepting the entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah's Witnesses. What do such beliefs include? ...That 1914 marked the end of the Gentile Times and the establishment of the Kingdom of God in the heavens, as well as the time for Christ's foretold presence." (Watchtower, Question From Readers, April 1, 1986 pp 30-31) Jehovah lives in Pleiades star cluster galaxy... 1927 "The face of the deep, of course, would be toward the Pleiades, which are

claimed to be the habitation of Jehovah." (Creation; 1927; 2,175,000 ed.; p. 94) 1928 "The constellation of the seven stars forming the Pleiades appears to be the crowning center around which the known systems of the planets revolve even as our sun's planets obey the sun and travel in their respective orbits. It has been suggested, and with much weight, that one of the stars of that group is the dwelling-place of Jehovah and the place of the highest heavens;..." (Reconciliation; 1928; p. 14) 1928 "The constellation of the Pleiades is a small one compared with others which scientific instruments disclose to the wondering eyes of man. But the greatness in size of other stars or planets is small when compared with the Pleiades in importance, because the Pleiades is the place of the eternal throne of God." (Reconciliation; 1928; p. 14)

Spelling of "Jehovah" originated with Catholic monk in 13th century??? 1971 "The first recorded use of this form [Jehovah] dates from the thirteenth century C.E. Raymundus Martini, a Spanish monk of the Dominican Order, used it in his book Pugeo Fidei of the year 1270 C.E." (Aid to Bible Understanding" p. 884-885) No actual evidence "YHWH" was ever used in the New Testament...Just a guess??? 1971 Why, then, is the name absent from the extant manuscripts of the Chritsian Greek Scriptures or the so called 'New Testament'? Evidently because by the time those extant copies were made (from the third century C.E. onward) the original text of the writings of the apostles and disciples had been altered. The divine name in the Tetragrammaton form was undoubtedly replaced with 'Kyrios' and 'Ho Theos' by later copyists." (Aid to Bible Understanding" p. 887) Skin Cancer anyone? 1933 "The earlier in the forenoon you take the sun bath, the greater will be the beneficial effect, because you get more of the ultra-violet rays, which are healing" (Golden Age, Sept. 13, 1933, p. 777) The Space Shuttle is impossible?

1943 "Man on earth can no more get rid of these demonic `heavens' (the organization of wicked spirits) than man can by airplane or rockets or other means get up above the air envelope which is about our earthly globe and in which man breathes." (The Truth Shall Make You Free, 1943, p. 285) Medical misinformation from the prophet? Eye Of Newt Anyone??? 1925 "There is no food that is right food for the morning meal. At breakfast is no time to break a fast. Keep up the daily fast until the noon hour... Drink plenty of water two hours after each meal; drink none just before eating; and a small quantity if any at meal time. Good buttermilk is a health drink at meal times and in between. Do not take a bath until two hours after eating a meal, nor closer than one hour before eating. Drink a full glass of water both before and after the bath." (Golden Age, Sept. 9, 1925, pp. 784-785)

It is OK to Lie for God? 1960 "the Scriptures justify the 'war strategy' of hiding true facts from the enemy." (Watchtower May 15, 1960, page 295) 1960 "As a soldier of Christ he is in theocratic warfare and he must exercise caution when dealing with God's foes. Thus the Scriptures show that for the purpose of protecting the interests of God's cause, it is proper to hide the truth from God's enemies." (Watchtower; 6/1/1960; p. 352) "While malicious lying is definitely condemned in the Bible, this does not mean that a person is under obligation to divulge truthful information to people who are not entitled to it. ... Evidently the course of Abraham, Isaac, Rahab, and Elisha in misdirecting or in withholding full facts from non-worshipers of Jehovah must be viewed in the same light.-Ge 12:10-19; chap 20 [Abraham lying to Pharoah and Abimelech]; 26:1-10 [Issac lying to Abimelech]; Jos 2:1-6; Jas 2:25 [Rahab lying to king of Jericho]". (Insight on the Scriptures, it-2 245, Note: bracketed text [ ] added. It would be interesting to see how Jw's view Noah's example of getting drunk and Lot's example of incest.) 1993 "Rahab--Declared Righteous by Works of Faith, What about Rahab's misleading words to pursuers of the spies? God approved of her course. (Compare Romans 14:4)

She took a risk in order to protect his servants, giving evidence of her faith. While malicious lying is wrong in Jehovah's eyes, a person is not obligated to divulge truthful information to people who are not entitled to it. Even Jesus Christ did not give full details or direct answers when doing so could have brought unnecessary harm. (Matthew 7:6; 15:1-6; 21:23-27; John 7:3-10) Evidently, Rahab's course of misdirecting the enemy officers must be view in that light." (Watchtower 114:24, Dec. 15, 1993, p. 25) Of course, Jehovah's Witnesses got this doctrine from the Catholics: So ... a false statement knowingly made to one who has not a right to the truth will not be a lie. (Catholic Encyclopedia, IX, 471) ... we are ... under an obligation to keep secrets faithfully, and sometimes the easiest way of fulfilling that duty is to say what is false, or to tell a lie. (Catholic Encyclopedia, X, 195) More doctrine Jehovah's Witnesses got from the Roman Catholics. ... the unbelieving ... and murderers ... and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire & brimstone ...Revelation 21:8 Celebrating Christmas and civil holidays approved? 1904 "Even though Christmas is not the real anniversary of our Lord's birth, but more properly the annunciation day or the date of his human begetting (Luke 1:28), nevertheless, since the celebration of our Lord's birth is not a matter of divine appointment or injunction, but merely a tribute of respect to him, it is not necessary for us to quibble particularly about the date. We may as well join with the civilized world in celebrating the grand event on the day which the majority celebrate "Christmas day."" (Watchtower, Dec. 1, 1904, p364) 1918 "In accordance with the resolution of Congress of April 2nd, and with the proclamation of the President of the United States of May 11, it is suggested that the Lord's people everywhere make May 30th a day of prayer and supplication. God was graciously pleased to cause this nation to be formed and to grow under the most favorable conditions in the world for the preservation of liberty, civil and religious. This is the land divinely `shadowed with wings' - overshadowed by the providential watchcare of God's Word - where God has lifted up an ensign on the mountain (kingdom), and where he has blown the trumpet message of the truth. ..." (Watchtower, Jan. 6, 1918, p174)

Human governments are a source of good 1919 "We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express... the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make of all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble." (Watchtower, Feb, 15, 1919, p51) What of them all is finally true?

8) Question: The ''Organization of Jehowah'' is based only in the Scripture,and if so, in what kind of scripture? The ''New World Translation'' is the only Bible that you accept? Is there an Ancient text,or not? (So-in that way,the research for the truth get simplified)... Why do you not accept any other? Do you accept the Old Testament Septuagint? Why not? Jehovah's Witnesses say that the antichrist is not a person but a condition or a state. So the devil leads people to heresy, the delusion, and deception So they do not know what to wait.By the same way that deceives the heresies for the Son of God, Who reduces to a ''creature'', exalting Satan to God saying that Jesus is brother of the Lucifer(!!!), (Like the Mormons, the Jehovah Witnesses also teach that Jesus and Satan are spiritual brothers-Jesus and Satan are not brothers. Jesus is God and Satan is one of His creations. Not only are Jesus and Satan not brothers, they are as different as night is from day. Jesus is God incarnate—eternal, all knowing and all powerful while Satan is a fallen angel that was created by God for God‘s purposes) thus, in the same way calls

the antichrist an impersonal force, a situation, as degraded the Holy Spirit into an impersonal force. A complete distortion! Clearly the Bible warns us that the antichrist is a person: 46 Prophecies the Antichrist will fulfill 1. The antichrist will be a man - Daniel 7:24-25 2. He will confirm a covenant for 7 years - Daniel 9:27 Now also, this does not mean that he creates this covenant. The word here for "confirm" is 1396 gabar (gaw-bar'); a primitive root; to be strong; by implication, to prevail, act insolently: KJV-- exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more [strength], strengthen, be stronger, be valiant. The antichrist will strengthen a covenant for a 7 year time span. Now this could be an existing covenant (like the Jerusalem Covenant) or a new covenant drawn up at that time. 3. He will rise among 10 kings - Daniel 7:8 This 10 nation union will be a revived Holy Roman Empire - Daniel 2:44 4. He will uproot 3 kings from the original 10 kings to gain political power - Daniel 7:8 5. His 10 nation union will merge into a world government which he will dominate Revelations 13:1-2 Now this also, could refer to several things. First, the 10 nations could merge into an EXISTING world government, such as the U.N. Or it could for a new world government, much like the U.N. Or, this 10 nation confederation could be something like the new 10 nation common stock market. A union like this would definitely rule the world, without having a "seat" of power. Whoever controls the money, controls the globe. 6. He will ascend to power on a platform of peace. By peace, he will destroy many Daniel 8:25 7. He will be promoted and exalted by a miracle working religious partner (false prophet) - Revelations 13:11-12 8. He was, and is not, and yet is - Revelations 17:8 More than likely this is referring to political power. The antichrist will have ruled, but then be taken out of power. Only to rise back up again to power as the head of the One World Government. 9. The world government over which he rules will be a red (communistic or socialistic) government - Revelations 17:14 10. The antichrist will be preceded by 7 kings or rulers. He will be the 8th king. He will also be "of" the 7 - Revelations 17:11 Now this scripture has many different ways it can be viewed. The word "goeth" in the scripture is 5217 hupago (hoop-ag'-o); from 5259 and 71; to lead (oneself) under, i.e. withdraw or retire (as if sinking out of sight), literally or figuratively: KJV-- depart, get

hence, go (a-) way. So we see that he will withdraw or retire from sight. But will rise back up again to power. Now this could be taken as to mean 7 kings. Or this could be taken as 7 World Governments that have ruled. So far there have been 6. 1. Egypt. 2. Assyria. 3. Babylon. 4. Medo-Persia. 5. Greece. 6. Rome 11. He will have a mouth speaking great things. Very boastful - Daniel 7:8 12. His look will be more stout than his fellows - Daniel 7:20 The word "stout" means 7227 rab (rab); by contracted from 7231; abundant (in quantity, size, age, number, rank, quality): KJV-- (in) abound (-undance, -ant, -antly), captain, elder, enough, exceedingly, full, great (-ly, man, one), increase, long (enough, [time]), (do, have) many (-ifold, things, a time), ([ship-]) master, mighty, more, (too, very) much, multiply (-tude), officer, often [-times], plenteous, populous, prince, process [of time], suffice (-lent). So this can have several meanings. It could mean one of the following: the antichrist will be larger in size than everybody else, will be older than everybody else, will have more of a "following" than anybody else, is a higher military or political rank than anybody else, or is more qualified than anybody else. What ever this verse is speaking about, it is obvious when you look at him. 13. He will have a fierce countenance - Daniel 8:23 14. He will understand puzzling things - Daniel 8:23 15. He will cause craft to prosper - Daniel 8:25 It is interesting to note the definition of the word "craft" here. It is 4820 mirmah (meer-maw'); from 7411 in the sense of deceiving; fraud: KJV-- craft, deceit (-ful, -fully), false, feigned, guile, subtilly, treachery. No wonder, for the Bible says that he is the father of lies. So his policy or his success will make it possible for his deception of the world to prosper. God said that if you do not believe the truth, that he would send strong delusion that you should believe a lie. 16. He apparently assumes world dominating power 3 1/2 years after he confirms the covenant. He then will continue to reign for 42 months - Revelations 13:5 17. The Abomination of Desolation is the event that signals the beginning of this final 42 months - Daniel 9:27 It is interesting to note, that many scholars believe that at the Abomination of Desolation is when Revelations 12:7-10 occurs. At which point the Antichrist becomes "possessed" by Satan himself and then forces the Mark or death upon everybody. 18. He opposes God - 2 Thessalonians 2:4 19. He will speak marvelous things against the God of gods - Daniel 11:36 20. He will exalt himself above all that is called God - 2 Thessalonians 2:4 21. He will sit in the temple of God - 2 Thessalonians 2:4 22. He will claim to be God (or an incarnation of God) - 2 Thessalonians 2:4 23. He will take away the daily sacrifices from the temple - Daniel 11:31

24. He will plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain - Daniel 11:45 It would seem here that the Antichrist will setup small "fortifications" in between the sea and Jerusalem, to help keep control over things in distant areas away from the main offices. 25. He will have power to make war with the saints and to overcome them Revelations 13:7 26. He will continue this war with the saints for 3 1/2 years - Daniel 7:21, 25 27. This time of Great Tribulation is launched upon the Earth by the antichrist at the Abomination of Desolation. - Matthew 24:15,21. Up until this time, it would seem that he is a man of peace and not war. But now he shows his true colors. Perhaps is possessed by Satan himself at this point as well. Which would account for the false front being dropped at this time. 28. During this time, the antichrist will scatter the power of the holy people - Daniel 12:7 29. He will rule a mighty and strong kingdom - Daniel 7:7 30. He was given power over all kindreds, tongues and nations - Revelations 13:7 31. His kingdom will devour the whole earth - Daniel 7:23 32. He will have great military power that will stand behind him, to enforce his laws Daniel 11:31 33. He will try to change times and laws; and they will be given into his power for 3 1/2 years - Daniel 7:25 34. He will give great honor to the God of forces, with gold, silver, jewels, etc - Daniel 11:38 35. He will prosper in everything that he does - Daniel 8:24 36. He will not regard the God of his fathers - Daniel 11:37 37. He will not regard the desire of women - Daniel 11:37 It is interesting to note here that most people think that he will be a homosexual, which could be. But rather I think that he will place limitations upon children being born. Similar to what is being done in China now. Why? Because it is the natural desire of a woman, that God has given to them, to be a mother. By not regarding this natural desire, he would cause a "forced" limit on the amount of children a woman was "allowed" to have. 38. The mark of the beast will be the amount of his name - Revelations 14:11 39. All that dwell upon the Earth will worship him, except those who's names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life - Revelations 15:2 40. He will have an image made after him - Revelations 15:2 This could also be in reference to his kingdom's logo or insignia. Much like the U.N.

has a logo that every soldier on a U.N. mission must wear, there might also be a logo or insignia that his armies would have to wear His coming will be after the workings of Satan - 2 Thessalonians 2:8 41. He will fight against Jesus Christ at Armageddon (and loose I might add!) Revelations 17:14 42. He will stand against the Prince of princes - Daniel 8:25 43. The Lord will consume him with the spirit of his mouth (which is the Word of God) - 2 Thessalonians 2:8 44. The Lord will destroy him with the brightness of his coming (which is his glory) - 2 Thessalonians 2:8 45. He will be cast alive into the lake of fire - Revelations 19:20 46. He will be tormented day and night for ever and ever - Revelations 20:10 Can the Bible to be interpreted by anyone alone?everyone can interpret it, or only through the Holy Tradition-which sects threw in the trash with the'' discover'' of ''apostasy''; If so, Christ says in a paragraph that :''I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd''.(John 10:16)

What does He mean here? The aliens! also: "Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice''. (John 5:28). Question: So, all of them who are not in graves (Died at sea, burned, dispersed, etc.) will not be resurrected! Can you see where heresy and blasphemy leads? How can you not accept Saint-Ignatius (disciple of St. John the Theologian), Polycarpos, Titos, the first apostles and their disciples, but instead to accept influences from America of someone called Russel, Rotherford,and taunt the disciples of the apostles who were with them twenty four hours a day for many years? King James Version the most masterful and perfect Bible? 1927 "Doubtless there has never been a more masterful and perfect english

publication than the Authorized Version of the Bible." [King James Verson] (Creation; 1927; p. 117) Jw's Accuse others who were false prophets??? If ever there was a case of the pot calling the kettle black... This is it! 1930 "The false prophets of our day are the financial, political and clerical prognosticators, They assume to foretell future events; but their dreams or guesses never come true,.... In 1914-1918 these same three classes told the whole world that the great world war would end all wars and make the world safe for democracy...their prophecies did not come true. therefore, they are false prophets; and the people should no longer trust them as safe guides..." Watchtower, May 15, 1930, p. 155-156 1958 "'Sometime between April 16 and 23, 1957, Armageddon will sweep the world! Millions of persons will perish in its flames and the land will be scorched.' So prophesied a certain California pastor, Mihran Ask, in January 1957. Such false prophets tend to put the subject of Armageddon in disrepute." Watchtower, Oct. 15, 1958, p. 613 The differences between translations How is it possible ( since Protestants say that they ―do not stray from the Holy Bible‖ ) that they are in disagreement amongst each other? If the Holy Bible had indeed been given by God as a ―written article of faith‖ - a complete guide on what we should believe in – then they should all be in agreement amongst themselves, as to what it really states; in reality, however, their divergences are enormous. If God had wanted us to use the Holy Bible as the only guide for the faith, He would have ensured that its contents were exactly the same in every language, and in every translation.

However, it is a fact that apart from the different translations in Greek

and Hebrew, where the words are rendered differently, there are also differences in the interpretations from language to language. In fact, it is customary for the various religions to each create their own translation, in order to alter its meaning, according to their individual dogmatic peculiarities.

Only the Bible?

As an example of this, we shall refer to an excerpt of the Holy Bible, relative to this topic, as recorded in the ancient text, and as distorted by assorted translations, after being influenced by Protestant traditions. We refer to Timothy II, chapter 3:16, where, according to the text, it says: ―Every divinely inspired scripture (is) also beneficial for teaching, for checking, for rectification, for education within justice….‖ However, various translations of this verse quote it as follows:

―The Scripture is divinely inspired and beneficial for teaching,

for checking ….…‖ These translations have inserted the article ―the‖ and have also placed the word ―is‖ before the word ―divinely inspired‖, thus giving the impression that this verse is referring to ―THE‖ Scripture overall. It is with this alternative presentation that they attempt to support their viewpoints that ―ONLY the Holy Scriptures are divinely inspired‖. Nonetheless, this verse does not maintain that ONLY the Holy Bible is divinely inspired. In actual fact, it is pointing out that ―Every divinely inspired writing (is) also beneficial….‖

This verse makes no mention whatsoever of the Holy Bible! It speaks

of any (=every) divinely inspired writing! Besides, when this verse was being composed, only the Old Testament was acknowledged as the Holy Bible. Someone may protest to this, saying: ―But there is no other divinely inspired writing, apart from the Holy Scriptures!‖ NOWHERE IN THE HOLY BIBLE DOES IT SAY THAT IT IS THE ONLY DIVINELY INSPIRED WRITING! If someone does say this, he says it on his own initiative, without being able to justify his viewpoint from within the Holy Bible. In this case, he is not acknowledging the Holy Bible only – as he claims – but, is also acknowledging something of his own, i.e., that he is obliged to acknowledge only what is written in the Holy Bible. In reality, there is no mention in the Holy Bible that it alone is divinely inspired, nor does it say anywhere that we are obliged to accept only the Bible and nothing else! These assertions however, are something entirely different! They comprise a

non-Christian, worldly tradition, which the Church never upheld during its 20 centuries.

The credibility of the Church The Holy Bible itself does not agree with the concept that we must accept it as being the article and the basis of the faith. Paul the Apostle states this very clearly, in his Epistle to Timothy I, chapter 3/III:15: ―..and if I should be delayed, (I am writing to you) so that you may know how to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the Church of the Living God, the pillar and the basis of the truth.‖ According to these words, if we desire to learn the truth, the basis of our faith does not lie in the Holy Bible, but in the Church!. As Holy and divinely inspired as the Bible may be, it was not written for the purpose of supporting our dogmas. The dogmas are supported by the Church. The Holy Bible is merely one of the means that the Church expresses itself! And the Church has many means for divinely inspired expression. The verse quoted above also replies to the question that is posed by some, i.e.: ―Even if it is accepted that there are other divinely inspired writings beyond the Holy Bible, how can we feel sure about anything else outside the Holy Bible that may have been written so close to Christ‘s time?‖ The answer is: Just as the Church had vouched for the credibility of the Holy Bible, in the same way it can vouch for the credibility of the remaining Ecclesiastic tradition. If the Church is to be considered untrustworthy to vouch for a certain text, then it will necessarily be considered untrustworthy in its selection of books for the composition of the Holy Bible! Given that the Holy Bible doesn‘t contain any index of its books, the reader must necessarily resort to traditional sources outside the Holy Bible. As we know, the New Testament took on its present form during the 4th century A.D. when the Canon of Saint Athanasios prevailed, which for the first time added the book of Revelations to the New Testament. Up to that time, no Canons had included it. So, how can anyone accept the book of Revelations (which was a 4th century choice) and reject older texts of the Church as unreliable ones? Various Protestant religions, as by-products of the 16th century Reform era and

lacking any historical continuity from the time of the Apostles, have placed in doubt the pre-existing (to Protestantism) Church and arbitrarily declare that the Church was in apostasy. In this way, they have acknowledged only the Holy Bible, which apparently dates back to the time of the Apostles. The truth is, that the 4th century Church (which they do not acknowledge) was the one that defined which books were to comprise the Holy Bible. There were other, 1st century writings at the time; on the basis of the 4th century‘s tradition, Saint Athanasios selected those books that concurred with Ecclesiastic Tradition. To the extent, therefore, that Sacred Tradition is considered apostatic and wrong during the 4th century, to the same extent the Holy Bible must be considered equally apostatic and wrong. Apparent contradictions ―But then, why are there contradictions in the Holy Bible and the rest of Tradition?‖ one might ask. The fact is, that there is no contradiction. Just as a non-believer reads the Holy Bible distrustfully, finding contradictions from book to book, in the same way, Protestants will find the same apparent ―contradictions‖ if they read any of the other divinely inspired writings distrustfully. In the Holy Bible for example, we read in Matthew 23/XXIII 9: ―….do not address anyone on earth as your father‖; but in another verse, in Corinthians I, 4/IV 14-15, the Apostle Paul calls himself the father of Corinthians, and he in fact tells them that they have no other father except him! The faithful can discern the difference in the meaning of the word ―father‖ in these two verses. In the first verse above, the word is used in its absolute sense, appropriate only for God, and in the second verse, it is used in a relative sense, which is appropriate for people also. A non-believer‘s comment however, would be that these two verses are contradictory, just as a Protestant accuses the Church that it addresses ordinary people as ―fathers‖. It is interesting to note that this person doesn‘t accuse the Apostle Paul of contradicting Jesus Christ in his Epistle! He does locate contradictions however, in the remaining Sacred Tradition… The same occurs, with everything else in the Sacred Tradition that Protestants accuse. It would be more responsible of them if, before accusing, they enquire as to the reason something is said, and not invent reasons of their own.

The divinely inspired sources of the faith All of the above indicate yet another dimension regarding the understanding of what is written. The fact that everyone indulges in interpreting the Holy Bible according to his own judgment, resulting in the thousands of miscellaneous religions each insisting that their interpretation is the correct one, is proof enough that the Holy Bible alone is not the safest guide to God. The guidance of the Church is imperative: the Church that drafted and selected the books of the Holy Bible. It is the Church, as the pillar and the basis of the truth that has preserved the Gospel unaltered throughout the centuries. Wherever there are blanks in the Holy Bible, these are filled by the other, divinely inspired sources.

This is why the Orthodox Church uses the following, divinely inspired writings, which are in complete harmony amongst themselves: The Holy Bible, The rulings of the ecumenical councils (synods), The patristic texts that were approved by ecumenical councils, Church hymnology, Liturgical texts. All of these, are in full accord with each other, and with all the charismatic saints throughout the ages. The viewpoint of the Holy Bible ―But then (a reader may persistently ask), why is it that at the end of the Bible, it prohibits the addition or the removal of whatever is written in it?‖ The truth is, that the book that this verse refers to, is Revelations (Revelations, 22/XXII v.18-19), and not the Holy Bible as a whole. It could not possibly be implying the Holy Bible, because it mentions ―in this prophecy‖. Furthermore, the book of Revelations was added to the Holy Bible in the 4th century for the first time. And what is more important, John‘s Epistles II and III were written in 98 A.D., two years after the book of Revelations! If this verse therefore implies all of the Bible books, then they too would

have to be left out of the Bible. On the contrary, the Holy Bible says that there are other sources apart from it. In the last verse of John the Evangelist, it says: ―… Jesus did many other things, which, if written down one by one, there would not be enough room in the world to hold those writings‖. And elsewhere, the Holy Bible itself asks us –by the mouth of the Apostle Paul- not to reject Sacred Tradition; In Thessalonians II, 2/II 15 we read: ―Therefore my brethren, stay steadfast and preserve the traditions that you were taught, either verbally, or through an Epistle of ours.‖ So, apart from everything that was written in the Epistles of the Apostles, their word was also recorded, and preserved to this day, along with the remaining tradition. Why then, don‘t the deniers of tradition accept these words of the Holy Bible? They should be very careful when invoking the words of the Lord that were directed against the tradition of the Pharisees, because those words were directed against Judean tradition, and not Christian tradition. Christian tradition also includes ―solid sustenance‖, which the Apostle Paul refers to in his Epistle to Hebrew, in chapter 5/V 11-14. In this most difficult epistle of the Holy Bible, the author refers to all of these as ―milk‖. But if that is the case, then the Holy Bible mustn‘t contain the ―solid sustenance‖!! Consequently, ―solid sustenance‖ must be sought in the rest of the Sacred Tradition. The same thing is apparent in verse 19 in Peter‘s Epistle II. In there, the divinely inspired prophetic word is merely a lamp that glows in a dark place, until the light-bearer comes forth inside our hearts. Let us therefore prudently use this lamp (the Holy Bible), which is the introduction into the faith, so that we may be granted the appreciation of everything that God has to teach us. Is the Holy Bible the ONLY source of faith? Recently, we had extended an invitation to Protestants everywhere. We had dared them to show us AT LEAST ONE VERSE OF THE HOLY BIBLE that says we should accept only

the Holy Bible as the source of faith. In reply, we received the following verses, which we studied appropriately, and are submitting them here, for all those who might be interested. As any logical person can see, none of these verses responds to our invitation. OUR INVITATION THEREFORE STILL STANDS! Those who uphold the Protestant viewpoint that we are supposedly obliged to accept ―ONLY‖ the Holy Bible as the Word of God and nothing else, have –in their desperate attempt to prove the unproveable- quoted a multitude of verses, which, however, say nothing of the sort. As the reader will observe, these are verses that are entirely irrelevant to the whole of the Holy Bible and are being used in a desperate attempt, for lack of other verses. Further down, we shall submit a few of them, in the hope that Protestants will rethink matters seriously, and realize that their faith is entirely groundless, and definitely not Christian. Revelations 22/XXII

―…to the prophecy of this book if anyone adds anything, God

shall add upon him afflictions…. And if anyone removes something from the book of this prophecy, God shall remove….. from the tree of life…‖ The reference here is ONLY to the prophetic book of Revelations. If it was referring to the entire Holy Bible, then we shouldn‘t be accepting the last epistles by John, because they were written later than the Revelations! Neither do the other writings add to the Holy Bible, as they comprise independent texts and they do not make any such assertions. Deuteronomy 12/XII 32: ―Everything that I command you to do, make sure that you do it; you shall not add to it, nor remove anything from it‖ This verse is not referring to the Holy Bible, but to any commandment of God whatsoever, which includes the entire Holy Tradition. If it were referring to the Holy Bible, then no other book after Deuteronomy should have been added! Whoever accepts ONLY the Holy Bible as the source of faith is opposing this verse,

because it means they are removing the rest of Holy Tradition from the Word of God. Deuteronomy 17/XVII 18 - 20:

―...he shall write for himself a copy of this law, in a

book……and he shall read from it every day of his life…. to guard all of the words of this law and these commandments, so that he may enforce them…. and not stray from these commandments to the right or the left…‖ Here, reference is made to a small fragment of the Holy Bible, namely, the Law. Nowhere does it say that no other books are to be written within the Holy Bible later on, or even outside of the Bible. If this verse was confined ―only to the Law‖, then the New Testament never should have been written! And if this verse is not restrictive to the New Testament, it is equally not restrictive for the remaining, Divinely inspired Holy Tradition! We therefore ask those who use this verse ―without straying from the law‖ (meaning the Law of Moses): Do they uphold the Sabbath as foreseen by the Law, or do they perhaps ―stray from it‖? Are they still ―under guardianship‖? (Galatians, 4/IV 1-9) Deuteronomy 5/V 32: ―You shall therefore take care that you do as the Lord your God commanded you. You shall not stray to the right, or to the left‖. The same also applies here as in the previous reply, where the verse commands a precise compliance with God‘s commandments in the Mosaic Law. If someone wishes to apply it to the Holy Bible, then it should be applied to the Divinely inspired Holy Tradition, both written and spoken. (Thessalonians II, 2/II 15) Deuteronomy 4/IV 2: ―You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor shall you deduct from it, so that you might guard the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you‖ Here also, Moses warns the Israelites not to add or deduct anything form the Law that he delivered to them. We wonder, if the numerous other books that were added in the Holy Bible at a later time are not considered ―additions‖ and foreign to the Law, why should the remaining Holy Tradition be considered so? If someone accepts the addition of the remaining books of the Holy Bible, then they

should also accept the ―addition‖ of the remaining, Divinely inspired sources of the faith. Otherwise, they should stick to the Pentateuch alone! Proverbs 30/XXX 5 - 6: ―Every word of the Lord is tested….. Do not add to His words, in case He ever checks you and you are found to be a liar‖ Contrary to this verse, some people add their own viewpoint, by saying that it is referring to the Holy Bible, whereas the verse does not say anywhere that the ―Word of God is only the Holy Bible‖. The word of God is many more things than a single book, even a Divinely inspired one. The word of God has been recorded by the Church in a multitude of writings besides the Holy Bible, which makes ―liars‖ of all those who wish to confine it to the Holy Bible. The verse says ―every word of the Lord‖ – something that obliges them to accept it from other sources also, which the Church has delivered to us, even outside the Holy Bible. John 15/XV 15: ―... and I have considered you as friends, for I have made you familiar with everything that I heard from my Father‖ Again, this verse doesn‘t say that EVERYTHING Jesus heard from His Father has been written in the Holy Bible. On the contrary, John himself in the last verse (John 21/XXI 25), says that: ―There are many other things that Jesus did, which, if written down one by one, there would not be enough space in the world to hold the books that would be written.‖ So obviously, since the world cannot fit all those things that Jesus showed us, there must be many more things other than the Holy Bible that should be accepted by those who claim to be Jesus‘ ―friends‖, knowing how many things He must have to say to them. John 17/XVII 17: ―... Your word is the truth‖. Again, it doesn‘t say that the word of God is only the Holy Bible. His word includes much more. Galatians 10/X 6 - 10: ― I wonder, at how you so speedily move from the one who called to you in the grace of Christ, to another gospel…. those who upset you and meaning to turn about the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preaches to you the gospel different to how we preach it, let it be an anathema ….if

anyone preaches to you differently than what was received by you, le it be an anathema‖ It is admirable, how they who adulterate the Gospel, (in their desire to limit it to only one, Divinely inspired book – the Holy Bible), use this verse for true Christians, who embrace the entire word of God, and every spoken or written Divinely inspired Tradition that contains various aspects of the Gospel of Christ. These people teach a warped Gospel, inasmuch as THE GOSPEL is ONLY the Holy Bible and that we should not accept anything else outside of it! Even if the Holy Bible says no such thing anywhere! This false Gospel has led confessed Christians to become faithful to the letter and not to the Spirit! And they are so short-sighted, that even though they use this verse of Galatians, they do not read further down, where the Apostle Paul writes exactly those things against the people of the letter, who adhere ONLY to the Holy Bible (=the written Law), abandoning the Spiritual meaning of the words that are contained therein: (2/II 16): ―for no flesh shall be vindicated by its enactment of the law…‖ (3/IIIγ΄ 3): ―..are you so foolish, that having commenced in the Spirit you are now actuating in the flesh?‖ But even in his epistle to Romans, the Apostle Paul speaks of the same subject: Romans 2/II 29, 7/VII 6: ―…. Circumcision of the heart according to the Spirit, not the letter…‖, ―.. you should labor in the newness of the Spirit and not the oldness of the letter…‖ and in Corinthians 3/III 6: ―… who also made you able deacons of the New Testament, not according to the letter but the Spirit; for the letter deadens while the Spirit vivifies‖. So, those who say that ―We don‘t accept anything else apart from the Bible‖ should understand at last, that the Holy bible itself condemns them, because the Christian Gospel is not the Holy Bible, but the ―life in the Holy Spirit, and salvation through Jesus Christ‖. And the Holy Bible speaks of this. Colossians 2/II 8, 16 - 18:

―See that no-one of you is the one who misguides

through any philosophy and empty deception against the traditions of men according to worldly evidence and not according to Christ… therefore let no-one judge you in eating and drinking or during a feast or a new month or any Sabbath…‖ With this verse, they are obviously attempting to offend the Holy Tradition of the

Church. But this verse actually turns against them, as it speaks of ―human tradition‖, while we accept the spoken and written tradition of the Apostles, which is Divinely inspired. (Thessalonians II, 2/II 15). In fact, verse 16 becomes very specific, that it is referring to those who uphold the law of Moses on ―eating and drinking or during a feast or a new month or any Sabbath‖. In other words, it speaks against those who abandon the Spirit and become attached to the letter of the Mosaic Law, by upholding the Sabbaths and feasts, and abstaining from certain food according to the Law. We are of course referring to the Law that verses of Deuteronomy 12/XII 32, 17/XVII 18 - 20, 5/V 32, 4/IV 2 specify that we should not stray from these commandments of God, and that nothing should be added or deducted from these! These are the verses that we explained at the beginning, and which they provide as proof that we should accept only those that are mentioned there! But here, the Apostle (in the same verse that they mention) says that all these things of the Law are traditions that are not binding for Christians! So obviously, these people must re-examine what these verses mean! Titus 1/I 9: ― upholding the faithful word as you were taught, so that you be strong or comforting during healthy preaching, and reprimand those who contradict‖. Once again, it doesn‘t say here that the ―faithful word‖ is ONLY the Holy Bible. On he contrary, (according to Christians), it refers here to the entire Holy Tradition. Timothy II, 3/III 16,17: ―Every Divinely inspired Scripture is also beneficial for teaching, for checking, for restoring, for educating in justice, so that the person of God be complete, and equipped for every good deed.‖ Nor does this verse refer to THE Holy Bible (since it doesn‘t have a definitive article, nor was the Holy Bible fully structured yet); it refers to ―any divinely inspired scripture‖, which means ―any writing that was divinely inspired‖ and implies the whole of written Holy Tradition. In fact, even if it did refer to the Holy Bible, nowhere does it say that ONLY the Holy Bible is Divinely inspired. Timothy I, 4/IV 15 - 16, 6/VI 3 - 14:

― these you should study, in these you should

stand, so that your diligence is evident to everyone. Keep for yourself also the teaching, persistently. In doing this, you save yourself as well as those who listen to you.‖ ―If someone teaches other things and does not listen to the healthy words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teachings of reverence…. falling sick over conversations… you must keep the commandment unblemished, irreproachable, until the epiphany of our Lord Jesus Christ‖.

As any logical person can see, neither here is there any mention that we should accept ONLY the Holy Bible; in fact, it isn‘t even talking about the Holy Bible. On the contrary, it talks of ―words‖, which directs us basically to spoken tradition, given that they were later recorded in a multitude of texts (including the Holy Bible). Ephesians 2/II 19 - 22:

―... being built upon the foundation of the apostles and

prophets, whose cornerstone is Jesus Christ‖. Here it doesn‘t even refer to writings a all, only to the building of the Church. But even if was referring to writings, the fact that something is built upon the foundation of the apostles, would prove that newer, divinely inspired books are also acceptable. Acts 20/XX 28 - 31:

―...and amongst you will arise men who will speak in perverting

ways, in order to attract disciples to follow them… I did not cease to tearfully counsel them, one by one‖. Here he speaks against those pseudo-Christians who ―perversely‖ say that we should accept only the Holy Bible and reject verbal tradition, which the apostle ―tearfully‖ taught to a multitude of saints, personally. John I, 4/IV 6: ―...listens to us...‖. This refers to a sermon, not the Holy Bible. As is well known historically, somewhere about 200 years before the time of Christ the Jews translated their Scriptures into the Greek language. This translation was called the Septuagint (normally abbreviated as LXX).

It was a well respected

document throughout the ancient world including among the Jews themselves, especially among those who commonly used Greek as their language of communication. In fact the Scriptures were translated into Greek to make them more accessible to the rest of the world which used Greek as the universal language of the educated people. Many Jewish scholars themselves relied on the Septuagint in their own writings. About 100 years or so after the time of Christ, the Jewish rabbis began reconsidering the acceptability of the Septuagint for use by Jews. This seems in part to have occurred because of the Christian reliance on the Septuagint for their own claims about

Jesus being the Messiah and fulfilling Old Testament prophecies. After the Protestant Reformation, Protestant scholars in an effort to discredit the Roman Catholic Church abandoned reliance on the Septuagint and began using only Jewish versions of their Scriptures for translating the scriptures into modern languages. The Masoretic Text which became the official version of the Jewish Scriptures was finalized between the 7th-10th Centuries AD, and thus is not an older text than the Septuagint but a more recent text. The Masoretic text does correspond closely to Hebrew/Aramaic texts from the 2nd Century AD but differs at points from the Septuagint, sometimes significantly. Modern biblical scholars do consult the Septuagint even when they rely on the Masoretic Text because the Septuagint is more ancient than the Masoretic Text and because the Septuagint was translated from a more ancient Hebrew/Aramaic text and so allows us to know how Jewish scholars 200 years before Christ were interpreting and understanding their own scriptures. The Septuagint was not translated by Christians as Christianity did not exist at that time, so the Christians had no influence over the translation into Greek of the Jewish scriptures. It did happen however that the Christians found the Septuagint to be both a solid basis for Christian thinking and rather useful in polemics against the Jews of later Centuries. Since the time of the Reformation some Protestant biblical readers have distrusted the Septuagint and don‘t accept it as a legitimate bible for Christians to read. it is too ―Roman Catholic.‖

Some feel

Others think it an unreliable translation or interpretation

of the Jewish Scriptures, even though it was done by the Jews themselves and honored by the Jews at the time of Christ. Additionally, many scholars feel that the New Testament authors were very reliant on the Septuagint as demonstrated by their frequently using the Septuagint when quoting the Old Testament. As I was reading Robert Charles Hill‘s translation of ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM‘S COMMENTARY ON THE PSALMS Vol. 2

(pp 343-344), I came across two footnotes of

his that actually lend credence to the importance of the Septuagint (LXX) for our knowledge of the Old Testament.

Both of these footnotes were in regard to Psalm

145. ―…though our (Masoretic) Hebrew text has one verse (13) missing, which the LXX supplies, an inclusion confirmed by the Hebrew manuscripts discovered at the Dead Sea.‖

―This is the verse occurring in the LXX and a Hebrew ms found at Qumran; it is not in the Masoretic Hebrew text of this alphabetic psalm at the point where we would expect a verse beginning with the letter nun….‖ I have read various arguments about the reliability of the Septuagint version of the Jewish scriptures and arguments for why Protestant Scholars prefer the Masoretic Text when doing translation of the Old Testament.

But the Septuagint which is used

officially by Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox has shown itself to be a good window into the ancient Jewish (Pre-Masoretic) Scriptures.

Some have argued that

translators in the ancient world were more likely to eliminate parts of texts (accidentally or purposefully) than to add to them. At least in the two instances Hill mentions regarding the Psalms, the Septuagint may be relying on a more ancient text of the Hebrew Scriptures than the Masoretic Text does and thus gives us a better glimpse into the sacred writings of ancient Israel.

The Septuagint preserved

something the Masoretic text lost. THE ORTHODOX STUDY BIBLE itself bases its translation of the Old Testament scriptures on the Septuagint unlike Protestant versions of the Bible.

The OSB thus

follows the ancient Christian and traditionally historic version of the Scriptures which was commonly relied on by the first Christians themselves.

This is not to say that

common English versions of the bible are wrong, they simply follow Protestant principles in their translations of the Old Testament and thus have a less complete version of the Old Covenant scriptures.

SEPTUAGINT QUOTES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT Of the approximately 300 Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, approximately 2/3 of them came from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) which included the Deuterocanonical books that the Protestants later removed. This is additional evidence that Jesus and the apostles viewed the Deuterocanonical books as part of canon of the Old Testament. Below are some examples:

Matt. 1:23 / Isaiah 7:14 - behold, a "virgin" shall conceive. Hebrew - behold, a "young woman" shall conceive.

Matt. 3:3; Mark 1:3; John 1:23 / Isaiah 40:3 - make "His paths straight." Hebrew - make "level in the desert a highway." Matt. 9:13; 12:7 / Hosea 6:6 - I desire "mercy" and not sacrifice. Hebrew - I desire "goodness" and not sacrifice. Matt. 12:21 / Isaiah 42:4 - in His name will the Gentiles hope (or trust). Hebrew - the isles shall wait for his law. Matt. 13:15 / Isaiah 6:10 - heart grown dull; eyes have closed; to heal. Hebrew - heart is fat; ears are heavy; eyes are shut; be healed. Matt. 15:9; Mark 7:7 / Isaiah 29:13 - teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Hebrew - a commandment of men (not doctrines). Matt. 21:16 / Psalm 8:2 - out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou has "perfect praise." Hebrew - thou has "established strength." Mark 7:6-8

Jesus quotes Isaiah 29:13 from the Septuagint

This people honors me

with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Luke 3:5-6 / Isaiah 40:4-5 - crooked be made straight, rough ways smooth, shall see salvation. Hebrew - omits these phrases. Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 61:1 - and recovering of sight to the blind. Hebrew - the opening of prison to them that are bound. Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 58:6 - to set at liberty those that are oppressed (or bruised). Hebrew - to let the oppressed go free. John 6:31 / Psalm 78:24 - He gave them "bread" out of heaven to eat. Hebrew - gave them "food" or "grain" from heaven. John 12:38 / Isaiah 53:1 - who has believed our "report?" Hebrew - who has believed our "message?"

John 12:40 / Isaiah 6:10 - lest they should see with eyes...turn for me to heal them. Hebrew - shut their eyes...and be healed. Acts 2:19 / Joel 2:30 - blood and fire and "vapor" of smoke. Hebrew - blood and fire and "pillars" or "columns" of smoke. Acts 2:25-26 / Psalm 16:8 - I saw...tongue rejoiced...dwell in hope.. Hebrew - I have set...glory rejoiced...dwell in safety. Acts 4:26 / Psalm 2:1 - the rulers "were gathered together." Hebrew - rulers "take counsel together." Acts 7:14 / Gen. 46:27; Deut. 10:22 - Stephen says "seventy-five" souls went down to Egypt. Hebrew - "seventy" people went. Acts 7:27-28 / Exodus 2:14 - uses "ruler" and judge; killed the Egyptian "yesterday." Hebrew - uses "prince" and there is no reference to "yesterday." Acts 7:43 / Amos 5:26-27 - the tent of "Moloch" and star of god of Rephan. Hebrew - "your king," shrine, and star of your god. Acts 8:33 / Isaiah 53:7-8 - in his humiliation justice was denied him. Hebrew - by oppression...he was taken away. Acts 13:41 / Habakkuk 1:5 - you "scoffers" and wonder and "perish." Hebrew - you "among the nations," and "be astounded." Acts 15:17 / Amos 9:12 - the rest (or remnant) of "men." Hebrew - the remnant of "Edom." Rom. 2:24 / Isaiah 52:5 - the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles. Hebrew - blasphemed (there is no mention of the Gentiles). Rom. 3:4 / Psalm 51:4 - thou mayest "prevail" (or overcome) when thou art judged. Hebrew - thou might "be clear" when thou judges.

Rom. 3:12 / Psalm 14:1,3 - they "have gone wrong." Hebrew - they are "corrupt" or "filthy." Rom. 3:13 / Psalm 5:9 - they use their tongues to deceive. Hebrew - they flatter with their tongues. There is no "deceit" language. Rom. 3:13 / Psalm 140:3 - the venom of "asps" is under their lips. Hebrew - "Adder's" poison is under their lips. Rom. 3:14 / Psalm 10:7 - whose mouth is full of curses and "bitterness." Hebrew - cursing and "deceit and oppression." Rom. 9:17 / Exodus 9:16 - my power "in you"; my name may be "proclaimed." Hebrew - show "thee"; may name might be "declared." Rom. 9:25 / Hosea 2:23 - I will call my people; I will call my beloved. Hebrew - I will have mercy (love versus mercy). Rom. 9:27 / Isaiah 10:22 - only a remnant of them "will be saved." Hebrew - only a remnant of them "will return." Rom. 9:29 / Isaiah 1:9 - had not left us "children." Hebrew - Jehova had left us a "very small remnant." Rom. 9:33; 10:11; 1 Peter 2:6 / Isaiah 28:16 - he who believes will not be "put to shame." Hebrew - shall not be "in haste." Rom. 10:18 / Psalm 19:4 - their "voice" has gone out. Hebrew - their "line" is gone out. Rom. 10:20 / Isaiah 65:1 - I have "shown myself" to those who did not ask for me. Hebrew - I am "inquired of" by them. Rom. 10:21 / Isaiah 65:2 - a "disobedient and contrary" people. Hebrew - a "rebellious" people. Rom. 11:9-10 / Psalm 69:22-23 - "pitfall" and "retribution" and "bend their backs." Hebrew - "trap" and "make their loins shake."

Rom. 11:26 / Isaiah 59:20 - will banish "ungodliness." Hebrew - turn from "transgression." Rom. 11:27 / Isaiah 27:9 - when I take away their sins. Hebrew - this is all the fruit of taking away his sin. Rom. 11:34; 1 Cor. 2:16 / Isaiah 40:13 -the "mind" of the Lord; His "counselor." Hebrew - "spirit" of the Lord; "taught" Him. Rom. 12:20 / Prov. 25:21 - feed him and give him to drink. Hebrew - give him "bread" to eat and "water" to drink. Rom. 15:12 / Isaiah 11:10 - the root of Jesse..."to rule the Gentiles." Hebrew - stands for an ensign. There is nothing about the Gentiles. Rom. 15:21 / Isaiah 52:15 - been told "of him"; heard "of him." Hebrew - does not mention "him" (the object of the prophecy). 1 Cor. 1:19 / Isaiah 29:14 - "I will destroy" the wisdom of the wise. Hebrew - wisdom of their wise men "shall perish." 1 Cor. 5:13 / Deut. 17:7 - remove the "wicked person." Hebrew - purge the "evil." This is more generic evil in the MT. 1 Cor. 15:55 / Hosea 13:14 - O death, where is thy "sting?" Hebrew - O death, where are your "plagues?" 2 Cor. 4:13 / Psalm 116:10 - I believed and so I spoke (past tense). Hebrew - I believe, for I will speak (future tense). 2 Cor. 6:2 / Isaiah 49:8 - I have "listened" to you. Hebrew - I have "answered" you. Gal. 3:10 / Deut. 27:26 - cursed be every one who does not "abide" by all things. Hebrew - does not "confirm" the words. Gal. 3:13 / Deut. 21:23 - cursed is everyone who hangs on a "tree."

Hebrew - a hanged man is accursed. The word "tree" does not follow. Gal. 4:27 / Isaiah 54:1 - "rejoice" and "break forth and shout." Hebrew - "sing" and "break forth into singing." 2 Tim. 2:19 / Num. 16:5 - The Lord "knows" those who are His. Hebrew - God will "show" who are His. Heb. 1:6 / Deut. 32:43 - let all the angels of God worship Him. Hebrew - the Masoretic text omits this phrase from Deut. 32:43. Heb. 1:12 / Psalm 102:25 - like a "mantle" ... "roll them"... "will be changed." Hebrew - "raiment"... "change"..."pass away." Heb. 2:7 / Psalm 8:5 - thou has made Him a little "lower than angels." Hebrew - made Him but a little "lower than God." Heb. 2:12 / Psalm 22:22 - I will " sing" thy praise. Hebrew - I will praise thee. The LXX and most NTs (but not the RSV) have "sing." Heb. 2:13 / Isaiah 8:17 - I will "put my trust in Him." Hebrew - I will "look for Him." Heb. 3:15 / Psalm 95:8 - do not harden your hearts as "in the rebellion." Hebrew - harden not your hearts "as at Meribah." Heb. 3:15; 4:7 / Psalm 95:7 - when you hear His voice do not harden not your hearts. Hebrew - oh that you would hear His voice! Heb. 8:9-10 / Jer. 31:32-33 - (nothing about husband); laws into their mind. Hebrew - I was a husband; law in their inward parts. Heb. 9:28 / Isaiah 10:22 - "to save those" who are eagerly awaiting for Him. Hebrew - a remnant of them "shall return." Heb. 10:5 / Psalm 40:6 - "but a body hast thou prepared for me." Hebrew - "mine ears hast thou opened."

Heb. 10:38 / Hab. 2:3-4 - if he shrinks (or draws) back, my soul shall have no pleasure. Hebrew - his soul is puffed up, not upright. Heb. 11:5 / Gen. 5:24 - Enoch was not "found." Hebrew - Enoch was "not." Heb. 11:21 / Gen. 47:31 - Israel, bowing "over the head of his staff." Hebrew - there is nothing about bowing over the head of his staff. Heb. 12:6 / Prov. 3:12 - He chastises every son whom He receives. Hebrew - even as a father the son in whom he delights. Heb. 13:6 / Psalm 118:6 - the Lord "is my helper." Hebrew - Jehova "is on my side." The LXX and the NT are identical. James 4:6 / Prov. 3:34 - God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Hebrew - He scoffs at scoffers and gives grace to the lowly. 1 Peter 1:24 / Isaiah 40:6 - all its "glory" like the flower. Hebrew - all the "goodliness" as the flower. 1 Pet. 2:9 / Exodus 19:6 - you are a "royal priesthood." Hebrew - you shall be to me a "kingdom of priests." 1 Pet. 2:9 / Isaiah 43:21 - God's own people...who called you out of darkness. Hebrew - which I formed myself. These are different actions. 1 Pet. 2:22 / Isaiah 53:9 - he "committed no sin." Hebrew - he "had done no violence." 1 Pet. 4:18 / Prov. 11:31 - if a righteous man "is scarcely saved." Hebrew - if the righteous "is recompensed." 1 Pet. 5:5 / Prov. 3:34 - God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Hebrew - He scoffs at scoffers and gives grace to lowly. Isaiah 11:2 - this verse describes the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit, but the seventh gift, "piety," is only found in the Septuagint.

We know the history of writing of the Septuagint and believe in this ancient church legend. In the second year of rule of Ptolomaios the Second Philadelphus (282 BC), on the blessing of righteous protopriest Eleazar, the chosen from the 12 generations of Israel translators made this translation. Thanks to this providential matter, the spiritual preparation to the encounter and acceptance of the Son of God was spread beyond the Jewish nation and covered the population of the Mediterranean shores, which all in that time, in the lesser or greater degree spoke and understood Greek. How great the significance of the Septuagint in the matter of the first sermon of the Christianity was, can be seen from the fact that in the end of the 1st century an overwhelming majority of the converted into Christianity originated not from Hebrews or yet unprepared pagans, but the so-called proselytes, i.e. heathens, who were acquainted with the Old-Testament Law in Greek translation and attracted to it spiritually. This attraction to the Law of heathens was fulfilled by the Jews through spreading among the heathen the holy books in Greek, i.e. the Septuagint. The main flow of the process of spreading of the Christianity during the second half of the first century can be imagined likewise: heathens, communicating with the Jews, got from them holy books in Greek, read them, got attracted spiritually to these Divine words, searched but could not find neither in the very books, nor with the Jewish interpreters the explanations of many things, which stayed unclear for them in the Scripture. The Christian preachers came, and showing how everything, predicted in the Scripture, came to pass and happened in Jesus Christ, through that found new souls for the Lord. The history of a nobleman of the queen of Ethiopia, who was enlightened by Apostle Philip, is an illustration of this process. The references that exactly this way happened the conversion into Christianity during the sermon of St. Apostle Paul, we would find in the book of Acts: in Antiochia of Pisidia the holy apostle explains the history of the Old Testament in the Christian light, and "And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath. Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God" (Acts 13:42, 43). ""And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed" (Acts, 14:1). "Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of

the scriptures, Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ. And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few" (Acts 17:1-4). "The Christians accepted the Septuagint, as their own version of the Old Testament, and used it alone for sermons and protection of their faith. With that the Christians in the known measure assigned the Divine inspiration to the translation of the Septuagint, for its variants in the translation providentially helped the Christian arguments… The Septuagint made it easier for the Christian missionary work among heathens. It was that Bible, which the first fore-preachers of the Gospel had in hands, coming through all the parts of the Roman empire in the first years of the Christianity, when there were still no books of the New Testament. The ancient Judaism tilled the furrows for sowing the Evangelical seeds by the Septuagint in the Western world," — writes A. Daceman in his book "The New Light of the New Testament." Seeing, what a powerful weapon the Septuagint is for the attraction of people, whom they already thought to be their followers, to the hated by them Christianity; the leaders of Judaism with all their might started hating the Septuagint, in spite of the fact that this was the unique translation of the holy books, officially approved of by the Jewish religious authority and fulfilled by the unanimous exploit of all the 12 generations of Israel. The Talmud says: "Cursed is the day when the seventy Elders translated the Law into Greek for the Egyptian king. This day is similar to that, when Israel made the golden calf." Therefore, in the second century AD the Judaism makes new translations of the Old-Testament books into Greek. These are the translations of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion, made in the second century. In these translations the anti-Christian tendency — the attempt to change the Messianic places in the Old Testament, make them less evidently relating to Christ the Savior, is clearly seen. In the same time the Judaism started its grandiose work on the reformation of the original of the Holy Scripture — its ancient Hebrew text — to establish its stability. This reformation, which took place since the 2nd till the 8th centuries, consisted of the fact that the Jewish Scribes, the so-called Massorites, i.e. the keepers of tradition, according to the definite, checked by them sample rewrote all the books of the Holy Scripture, meant to be read in the synagogues, checked them letter by letter, entering the new system of vowels and punctuation marks. Then, under the fear of harem — a

curse, forbade the Jews the usage of any of other variants of the Holy Scripture, except for this, checked this way. With that, in their work on the Hebrew text the Massorites as well, in all ways, tried to put more shade to the clarity of the Messianic extracts, which predicted Christ the Savior. The fight around the prophesy of St. Isaiah is especially known: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son" (7:14). In the original text here, without a doubt, stood the word "Betula" — a Virgin, which now was proved by the newest discovery of the most ancient manuscript of the prophesy of Isaiah close to the Dead Sea. The holy 70 interpreters translated the word "Betula‘ with a Greek word "Parthenos." Meanwhile, the Jewish scribes in their Massorite variant instead of the word "Betula-Virgin" put the word "ga-alma" — a young woman. In the translations of Acquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion here in Greek is put the word "neanis" — a young woman, in spite of the fact that in this case this extract loses the meaning of the prophetic words, at which pointed even the ancient Christians apologists: what a sign can be the conceiving and birth of a son of a young woman, if it happens daily throughout the whole world? Thus, since the earliest époque of Its history the Church of Christ had to choose between the several variants of the Holy Scripture. The Church, absolutely definitely, without any hesitation, gave preference to the God-inspired translation of the 70, having made only one exception: the Church changed the book of Prophet Daniel according to the translation of Theodotion, for in the translation of the 70 here is seen a very notable difference with the Jewish original. With this detail the Church one more time showed that It is not bound by anything, even by the authority of the highly estimated by It holy ancient interpreters, but It freely chooses and recognizes Its Holy Scripture. The Church extremely reveres the translation of the 70 — the Septuagint. St. Irineus thinks that the holy interpreters were as much inspired by the Holy Spirit, as the prophets and apostles (Irineus 3, chap.11, 4). St. Justin the Philosopher in his "Addressing to the Greeks," Tertullian, St. Cyprian, blissful Augustine, Clement of Alexandria call the translation of the 70 as God-inspired. St. Basil the Great calls it the most famous in the Church. The Church gives Its preference to the translation of the 70, not only among other translations, but also prefers it to the Jewish original of the Old Testament. The Church does not rely onto the Jewish original of the Old Testament, to be more

exact, on its preserved till now form — the Massorite one, for during two thousands of years of the Christian history the Hebrew original was kept in the non-Christian medium, hostile to the Christianity, was re-written by the non-Christian hands. Even if one does not suspect any mal intention then anyway these non-Christian copyists could always make a mistake, not knowing the mysteries of the Christian faith and therefore not understand the complete meaning of those holy books, which they were rewriting; always could make a mistake, and, having made, could not understand that. The text of the translation of the 70 was kept in the Christian medium, was rewritten by the Christians, knowing the fullness of the sense of the Holy Scripture, and what is the most important — all the time it stayed under the unceasing control of the Church — the keeper of the Truth, the infallible image of the Holy Spirit. The Church admits that the Septuagint is not only an authoritative text, but defines the composition of the Holy Scripture according to the Septuagint. The Septuagint completely preserved the Holy Scripture, and the Massorite tradition partly lost it. We talk about the so-called "canonical" and "non-canonical" books of the Old Testament, the canon of which was defined by the council of the Jewish rabbis in Jamnia at the end of the 1st or the beginning of the 2d century AD. Surely the Church could not accept this cannon as the leading one for Itself, and instead of it, while defining the Divine inspiration of the Holy Books, is lead by Its rules: the 85th Apostolic rule, the 33d rule of the Carthage council, the 60th rule of St. Athanasius the Great, and by the ancient church tradition, which counts 50 books to be in the composition of the Holy scripture of the Old Testament. The Jerusalem local Council of 1672, the statements of which were established by the similar in time Constantinople council; and on the behalf of the Russian Church were signed by Its representative Archimandrite Joseph, proclaims: "The non-canonical book, senselessly and deliberately called apocryphal, are the invariable and functional part of the Holy Scripture." The Holy Scripture of the New Testament is very closely connected exactly with the Septuagint. Many places in the New-Testament books will not be clear, if we use any other variant of the Old Testament. For example, the reference of Ap. Paul in the Epistle to Hebrews (chap.1, verse 6) to Psalm 96:7, where, on the Massorite tradition stands "worship him, all ye gods," while Ap. Paul says: "let all angels of God worship Him," the way as we find in our text of the Septuagint. In the comparison with the Massorite text, the reference in the speech of Apostle James in the Acts (15:16) to prophet Amos is not clear. The references of Apostle John ""A bone of him shall not be broken" does not stand in the Massorite text in this way (but in the similar way), but

these words keep absolute precision in the text of the 70 (Ex. 12:10). The words of the Lord in the so-called "First Gospel" in the Massorite text, concerning the promise, given to the people after the downfall about the fact that "The woman‘s seed shall bruise serpent‘s head," which the Massorites do not have, and many other things. Not only inwardly, but as well outwardly the New Testament in its Greek original is closely connected exactly with the Septuagint. The entire Holy Scripture of the New Testament is written in the language of the Septuagint. Even the only New Testament book, which was originally not written in Greek, the Gospel of St. Mathew, soon after it was written was translated either by the very Evangelist or by apostle John the Theologian into the language, which we call the language of the Septuagint, for the Septuagint, as any literary work, created its language, and exactly in this language, and not in any variation of Greek are written all the New Testament books. Almost all the references to the Old Testament in the New One (except the Gospel of Mathew) are made onto the text of the Septuagint. To the fact how great the unity of the Septuagint and the New Testament is, testify the Protestant Biblicists, which do not have any grounds to be very much disposed to the Septuagint — the known German Biblicist E.V. Griffield and the Head of the Department of the Biblical History and Literature of the Sheffield University F.F. Bruce, referring to Griffield, writes: "Only the one, who studies the New Testament in Greek together with the Septuagint, gets the full understanding about the unity of the Bible, which he will not get by studying the Old Testament in another version" (F. F. Bruce, The Old Testament in Greek). Together with the New Testament the Septuagint with its content satiated the entire following life of the Church: Its order of Divine Services, Its edifications to Its children, the laws and rules of the church and the creations of the holy fathers. Let us get back to the Divine service. In the translation of the ancient Christian Divine service from Hebrew into Greek there appeared one more important change: the chanting form of the major part of the holy text was lost. It was saved in the Greek text only in those especially filled with chants parts of the Old Testament books, which especially rhythmically were translated into Greek and in the church official practice got the name of the Old Testament chants, and surely in Psalms, which were and remained the main source of the chanting material for the Divine service. That was why the most significant part of the Holy Scripture in Greek started to be read, but not chanted in the Divine services; they started to chant only psalms and the

Old Testament chants, to which further on were added those few chant-parts, which contain the Holy Scripture: the chant of the Theotokos in the encounter of Hers with St. Elizabeth (i.e. Magnification), the chant of Zechariah on the birth of St. John the Baptist and the chant of St. Simeon the God-Receiver. Because of this scantiness of the chanting material in Greek there appeared the need in new chants for Divine services. In the first Christian times was composed the based on the described in the Gospel angelic chant hymn "Glory to God in the highest" (the so-called Gloria), martyr Athenagor writes hymn "Gentle Light" and then the Church starts to be filled with inspired creations of the great church chant-composers. All these church creations unfailingly used the language, images and thoughts of the Holy Scripture. The law, which we established at the beginning of this essay: the preparation for the encounter and acceptance of the Son of God, which took place in both the historical and official process, but mostly through the Holy Scripture, — this law remains valid. Partly this connection is dictated by the very content of the Divine service. The order of the vespers consists of chanting and reading of Psalms, which later began to be mixed with chanting of the so-called sticheras, i.e. chants, which are devoted to the celebrated feast, and with the reading of the parts of the Old Testament books, the so-called paremias. Consequently, more than a half of the vespers consists of the Old Testament material, and new chants are composed in the language of the Holy Scripture, i.e. the language of the Septuagint. The same can be said about the matins, the first part of which consists as well of chants and reading psalms, and the second part of it — of chanting of the so-called Old Testament chants. Nowadays this second part is changed by chanting and reading of the so-called canons, which originally were composed as the commentaries to the words of the Old Testament songs. Only this alone defines the Biblical character of the content and language of the canons. The matins ends with the ancient Christian hymn "Glory to God in the highest." Finally the very Liturgy is significantly filled with the Biblical elements. In there, those elements are more adapted. Mostly the outline of the Liturgy is influenced by the least read in the church book of the Holy Scripture — the Revelation. The common arrangement of the Liturgy: standing of the clergy around the Throne, coming in and going out from the Altar, the terminology of the sacred acts: the Sacrifice, the Lamb,

the Holy Table, the Altar are, on the one hand, the reproduction of the ancient Old Testament sacred action. And on the other, and in the greater sense, are the reflections of the images of the Revelation. All the Liturgical phrases of a priest are either a literal reproduction, or a paraphrase of the doxologies of the Revelation. For example: "To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen" (Rev.1:6). "Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever" (5:13). "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things" (4:11). On the basis of the Revelation are composed many chants of the Liturgy, for example: "Holy, holy, holy, LORD God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come" (4:8). All this in the most profound and all-sided way fills the entire Divine service of the Orthodox Church with the words, images and thoughts of the Holy Scripture. Already for some times we drew attention to the inner basis of that. Now we shall say about the practical conclusion, which is important for those who would wish to occupy themselves with the holy and joyful, inspiring matter of translation of the infinite Divine service wealth of the Orthodox church into contemporary Western languages. For that one needs plunge into the Biblical form of his own mother language absolutely and completely. Only on this condition his translation will be full-value, artistically full-blooded and he will avoid both the dangers — Zillah and Haribda of any artistic translation: there will be neither slavish literal conveying of the strange text, nor free narration-interpretation, far from the original, for a translator, filled with the language of the Holy Scripture, will enrich his language through the source, which had enriched the language of those, whose works he translates — the church chants‘ creators. This, what we said about the connection of the New Testament with the Septuagint, we shall say concerning the Divine service. In it much stays unclear for us, if we use any other variant of the Holy Scripture of the Old Testament, but the Septuagint. For example, the 1st song of the canon of the Pentecost says: "Covered by the divine cloud, he that was slow of tongue proclaimed the Law written by God." Knowing the Holy Scripture an Orthodox understands that here the speech is about Moses, for like that "of uncircumcised lips" (tongue-tied) he is called in the book of Exodus in the translation of the 70, but not "non-verbal" as the Massorite text conveys (Ex.6:30). Without knowing the books of Maccabees, we would not understand, for instance, the 8th irmos of the 6th exclamation: "and purified the sacrifice of righteous with water"

where it is said about the event, described in the 1st chapter of the 2d book of Maccabees (and not about the sacrifice of prophet Isaiah, as some think. In this last case it would be "purified sacrifice and water"). In the 109th Psalm of the Massorite text there are no words of the Navity Prokimenon and verses "from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth," which are taken from the text of the 70. If we add that by the language of the Septuagint, with the same images, hints and indications of its sacred text are written the creations of the majority of the holy fathers of the Eastern Church, then we would understand that the above given words of E.V. Greenfield and F.F. Bruce that for the one, who is reading the Holy Scripture of the Old Testament in the translation of the 70 and the New Testament in the original, the inner and outer unity is being revealed more brightly and profoundly — these words can be related to the entire church field. For an Orthodox Greek, knowing the Holy Scripture of the Old Testament in the translation of the 70 and the New Testament in the original church narration, while reading the holy fathers and listening to and participating in the Divine services, the fundamental truth of the Orthodoxy that the voice of the Holy Spirit did not cease after writing of the last lines of the Holy Scripture, that in its full strength it continues to sound in the whole life of the Church, mostly in the Divine service and creations of Its holy fathers, reveals itself definitely and clearly. But this spiritually enriching realization becomes available not only to Greeks. Almost in the same measure we, the Orthodox Russians, possess it, for our Holy Scripture of the Old Testament in the church-Slavonic is strictly church-traditional, and we have the Divine service in the same language, in all senses. We sincerely want to wish the same to our West-European Orthodox brothers: to read carefully, get used to the God-inspired translation of the 70, to get imbued with its language, images, to choose the most ecclesiastic, traditional, proved and established by the Church among the codes of the New Testament, to master this language of the Old and New Testaments, and with the help of this language to translate the whole gigantic wealth of the Orthodox divine service. For the one, who will perfectly know the Biblical language, this task will be greatly simplified by the fact that the majority of phrases and images in the divine services‘ texts will be known to him, as if prepared for him.

But with that inevitably arises one more question, equally important as the question of the Septuagint. This question is: which variant of the New Testament must one use, to stay on the church path steadily? As it is known, already blessed Geronimo complained about the multitude of different versions in different manuscripts of the New Testament, saying: "Tot paene versiones, qout codides" — the variations are the same in numbers as codes. If we have a look at the critical publications, for example, of Nestle, with the scientific system, i.e. with the reference to different versions, we shall see that literally no word in the Holy Scripture will remain still. Though, the majority of these versions is insignificant: into "Capernaum" or into "Capernauma" came the Lord; "like light" His clothes was in the Transfiguration, or "like snow," etc. But there are very important differences, for instance, like: to enter or not the words of Christ "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting" into the Gospel of Mathew; to enter into the Gospel of Mark the second half of his narration about the Resurrection of the Lord. In the Gospel of Luke the malefactor asked the Lord to remember him "in thy kingdom" or simply remember? Should one enter into the Gospel of John the narration about the adulteress, about whom the Lord said to the scribes: "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." To enter or not into the Epistle of John the professing of the Holy Trinity: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one" ? All these things are the questions about the different versions. The modern Protestant publishing offices solve these problems in different ways: on the basis of the authority of various famous Biblicists, on the basis of accord between the majority of the manuscripts, i.e. on the principle of the majority of voices, or on the basis of the greater antiquity of the manuscripts, etc. All these are not our, church ways. The question of different versions can be interesting for us as well, but purely historically: what the variants of the text were. The critical publishing issues like of Nestle, where this question is put scientifically and visually — are useful. But we shall solve this problem, not guided by the testimony of the majority of manuscripts and not because of their antiquity, and less on the basis of the authority of the out-of-church Biblicists, but basing upon the voice of the Church. For us is infallible that the text of the Holy Scripture and the Old and New Testaments, which belongs to the Church, is accepted by It and exists for Its Divine life.

Applying the out-of-church scientific contemporary terminology, we more or less approximately can accept as the church text the group of manuscripts, which is marked with the letter "K," otherwise called as Keni or Constantinople, for these manuscripts in their majority and the samples, from which they were copied, were kept and rewritten under the guidance and control of the Church, while the rest of the groups of manuscripts, marked with the letters "H," "I‘ and "K" (Egyptian, Jerusalem and Western) are the fruits of labors of some persons and did not get the sanction of the Church. With this, it must be noted that exactly the manuscripts of the group "K" became the basis for the first Greek printed edition, made by Erasmus of Rotterdam in 1516 (only the Revelation in this edition was taken from another, unsatisfactory source). And the edition of Erasmus of Rotterdam under the name "textus receptus" became the source for the majority of the Western-European translations. The later translations in the majority of cases resort to other originals. We shall be faithful to the church ways. In the spiritual world there are many roads and paths, but the direct, correct and truthful way is always the one — the church way. It started with the creation of the world, the repentance of Adam, the exploit of Noah, the calling of Abraham, the history of the Chosen Nation, Christ the Savior, His holy Apostles, holy fathers, the exploit of monks and faithfulness of all the children of the Church of Christ and will continue till the end of ages. As any friendly family has its language, its expressions and images, the same way the people, belonging to this way have their own language, images, legends and traditions: one language, the same expressions and images since the Creation of the world and the time of the Sinai Law till the present days. This language, these images and expressions are good to be translated into all earthly dialects, if only to search for them, care about it and not to turn to the wrong paths.

9) Question: The Baptism of Jehowah's Witnessess does as the Bible says: (Matthew 28:19) '' IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT? If yes, after they refusing ''Trinity'' How:

I)Can someone baptized to: A) IN GOD B) IN His first creature, AND C) IN an impersonal force(!) II) Why does not say ''to the names of''? III) Or '' In the name of the Father and In the name of the Son and In the name of the Holy Spirit? (Maybe because the Name is common? YAHVEH) God The Witnesses contradict almost every basic Christian teaching, and those they don't contradict they usually ignore. They are fundamentally Unitarians. A leaflet published from their London office, called