I'm confused Vic; they seem to think they're Christian

The title of this entry relates to something I've said regarding the Jehovah's Witnesses and the fact that I said I didn't think they were Christian, I received this challenging (and most excellent) comment:

'I'm confused Vic; they seem to think they are?'

Indeed they do, or at least they want others to think that they are, but using the name Jesus in a different context to that which is considered to be orthodox doesn't make you Christian and more than using Man U as a focus for ridicule makes you their supporter. But the 'Christian' claim adds, or at least attempts to add, some integrity and implicit value to a bunch of (albeit nice) people who are not, as I understand it actually Christian.

I used to have a number of friends who talked of the bloke who started the thing off some 150 years hence and was quite impressed by some of their stuff, it all started to go wrong when I read about him flooding 'miracle wheat' what wasn't- in fact it was a bit of a scam and, if I recall correctly, he was found guilty of being just a bit dodgy!

But let's no dwell in ad hominem but look at what they believe - and here it might help if we had a look at the Creed, for this is surely a benchmark document. Here we find that the Witnesses focus entirely on Jehovah (the name sort of gives it away) - just one God (without the other two persons of the Trinity) and I have a recollection somewhere that Jesus and the archangel Michael are viewed as being one and he same. I also recall a quite interesting conversation with a friend over the lack of a cross with Jesus (my witness friend called it a 'torture stake') because they deny it was the way Jesus died (so no crosses either).

Mind you, Christian bits aside, there is a great belief that the first 144,000 faithful Witnesses make it into heaven with Jesus (useful to include Him, helps to confirm the 'Christian' label) and after that, the rest end up on Earth doing the gardening (so that's a religion that would work for my Wife's Dad - Tony's Grandad)!

They tend to use The New World Translation (NWT) because it's a version that they translated from all the original texts; and yet oddly it is apparently at odd with the versions I have on my shelf in a number of places. I have always been most taken up with John 1 which tells me: 'In beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and God was the Word.' But I find the NWT leads me to think that 'the Word was a god' and that's a big difference that supports the non-Trinitarian stance.

There's much that others point to regarding them (the Witnesses) but this (on both sides, the claims and the ridicule), stuff that is subsidiary and resides in the shadows behind the major errors - mind you they do think Jesus returned some hundred years back and this is why it's all gone Pete Tong since (was told that by a lovely bloke peddling magazines in Lichfield just after Easter - good to have no dogcollar some days!).

I guess I'll leave this short explanation as to the reasons I don't see Jehovah's Witnesses as Christian with a 'word from my sponsor' - remaining in John, this time in chapter 14:

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.”

Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.”
Jesus said to him,  “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip?
Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.  How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves."

I hope this provides some explanation to your question.

Harold Camping - Prophet or Prune?

Following on from one of the comments regarding the prophetic utterances of Harold Camping I thought I'd take a look at the man and see whether he's a force to be taken seriously or a foll who needs to be taken away and locked up.

Well, having read about him, I think he's well qualified to tell us when the rapture is going to happen, after all in 1992 he spake forth, saying:

“The results of this study indicate that the month of September of the year 1994 is to be the time for the end of history” (1994, New York: Vantage Press, p. 531).

He's appears to consider that “The work of the church is finished and that those who remain in the church, during the time of the on-coming “tribulation will be destroyed!" A further word of advice from the chap is that if you find a church where “It appears that each and every doctrine they hold is faithful to the Word of God, it should be avoided!" I find this odd as Jesus speaks of believers being one as He and the Father are one. This being one is called 'Church' and it seems to me that Harold is trying to pull this unity down by the application of a skewed mixture of OT Bible and eschatalogical witterings.

The more I read of the man, his words, and his predictions of the rapture the more I get the feeling that there is something awry with him and his teaching. He's into numerology (nothing wrong with that, it's cleaner and tidier than tea leaves), an inexact and pretty flawed practice when used to discern one's future.

He's also an annihilationist, which does away with the concept of hell (and so eternal separation from God for eternity goes out of the window) and therefore makes him just a little more suspect.

So, when all things are added together, my overall assessment is that he's a:

Mind you, if the Rapture does happens on the twenty-first of May, then I will of course be happy to reconsider that view!

Pax

Christian Brands? - Christian Science, Final thoughts

I've been reading Mary Baker Eddy's (MBE) 'Science and Health' (S&H) and have stumbled at a great many pages. The words she writes claiming that Christian Science came about because of "a spiritual sense of the Scriptures and through the teachings of the Comforter." (S&H 123:21-22) sound excellent and yet, throughout the book I find that I don't recognise 'the comforter' as the paraclete that is the Holy Spirit.

Throughout, it appears that the Holy Spirit is merely some form of maleable and 'apply here' force rather than a person and I have found this troubling.

It seems to me also that MBE feels she's locked onto the same methodology and means of healing that Jesus used and of course, I don't see it at that, Jesus was merely doing what He saw the Father doing and God was working with Him and through Him (and of course was Him!). I feel a devaluing of the role of the Holy Spirit and overall, the whole encounter has left me thinking that this is a very one-dimensional image of the Christian faith and the distortions in that image do (sadly) make it essentially non-Christian too!

I have struggled greatly with the healing aspects of CS, for after all, isn't this the crux and test of the CS faith? Not only that, as I understand it, death and sickness only came about because of the fall and therefore it's man's imperfection that lies at the root of illness. But not so says MBE:

“Man is spiritual and perfect - He is the compound idea of God, including all right ideas; the generic term for all that reflects God’s image and likeness - that which has not a single quality underived from Deity;” (S&H 475:11-20)

"The only reality of sin, sickness, or death is the awful fact that unrealities seem real to human, erring belief, until God strips off their disguise.” (S&H 472:27-29)

So there we have it. Humanity is perfect and the answer to absolutely everything is, 'it's all in the mind'!

I have spoken to (or attempted to speak) to active members and have found the responses rather limited and extremely vague and distant. I have been in receipt of various bits of quotation and idealised positions of where humanity is and yet there has been no reality to support this.

I have spoken to ex-members (who we have to acknowledge may well have axes to grind and grudges that colour) who have told me of loss of loved ones and the withholding of medical treatment such that people died terribly in terms of pain, length of illness and the like. Of a Jesus who was not God and God who was at variance with the Biblical understanding of Him (and that's without considering the Holy Spirit).

MBE writes that:

"If the student adheres strictly to the teachings of Christian Science and ventures not to break its rules, he cannot fail of success in healing." (H&S 448)

It seems to me then that there can be few strict adherents if this is the means and outcomes in healing are the test and if this is the case then, to be (sadly) honest, all falls and the whole philosophy and reality of the 'church' is in error.

For those who support, follow or are members of the Christian Science church, my prayer is that you come to know the person who is the Holy Spirit and that you, realising the brokeness and sin of humanity, come to Christ the rock and fall upon Him.

Pax