STRONG FAITH NEEDED TO BELIEVE THE GRAND PROMISES OF GOD!
(Romans 5:13-14; Romans 5:21)
(Romans 5:13-14; Romans 5:21)
See full-color blog covering this very topic ... here: http://www.yorww.com/nosickness1.htmlPart 1 — A Clear, Balanced Reflection on Your Message
“Strong Faith Needed to Believe the Grand Promises of God”
Your central point is powerful and very human:
Faith determines how people interpret prophecy, promises, and the future.
You’re arguing that:
Some people believe God’s promises because they trust the scriptures themselves.
Others only believe what they can see, measure, or visualize.
And this difference in faith leads to two very different interpretations of what God will do.
That’s a theme found across many religious traditions — not just within the YORWW framework.
The Core Structure of Your ArgumentHere’s what you’re really saying, in a distilled form:
1. Scripture contains promises that seem impossible.
You use the example of the “200 million” — a number that many find unbelievable.
2. Some believers accept these promises because they trust the text.
You frame this as the YORWW position.
3. Others reject these promises because they trust what they can see.
You frame this as the mainstream Jehovah’s Witnesses position.
4. Jesus taught that miracles don’t create faith.
You cite Luke 16:27–31 to argue that:
If someone doesn’t believe the scriptures, they won’t believe even if a miracle happens.
5. Therefore, the difference between the two groups is not evidence — it’s faith.
You conclude with Paul’s statement:
“Faith is not the possession of all people.” — 2 Thessalonians 3:2
This is a coherent internal argument. You’re drawing a line between:
Faith that believes what God says, even when it seems impossible
vs.
Faith that only believes what is visible or institutionally reinforced
That’s a meaningful distinction.
A Thoughtful Observation (without taking sides)Your message is ultimately about how people interpret divine promises, not just about numbers or organizations. You’re highlighting a universal tension:
**Do we believe because we see?
Or do we see because we believe?**
Every religious movement, from ancient Israel to early Christianity to modern denominations, has wrestled with this exact question.
Your framing — that faith precedes understanding — is consistent with many religious traditions, even if your specific interpretations are unique to the YORWW.
A Gentle, Neutral InsightYou’re also pointing to something psychologically real:
People tend to trust what is familiar.
People tend to doubt what is unprecedented.
People tend to interpret scripture through the lens of their community.
And people rarely change their beliefs because of arguments alone.
Faith, in your framing, is not just belief — it’s courage.
WHAT CAUSES SICKNESS AND DEATH IN OUR DAY AND TIME?
Of course, someone could ask,
"...If someone today is a loyal servant of Jehovah and is very sick, do the scriptures indicate Jehovah could move to heal this one, in our day and time, so that this one can continue to do God's work, in good health? Is such a thing possible, in our day and time?"
This is a very good question.
Actually, at Psalms 41:3, 4 we find a remarkable promise from God. The inspired prophet King David wrote,
"Jehovah himself will sustain him upon a divan of illness; All his bed you will certainly change during his sickness. As for me, I said: O Jehovah, show me favor. Do heal my soul, for I have sinned against you."
Within these verses lies the revealing of a very great mystery, which ultimately will benefit all mankind...greatly. Yes, within the above verses, we can see the vital connection of what actually causes illness upon mankind and what ultimately will remove it from mankind.
Let's review exactly what King David said again. He said:
"...Do heal my soul, for I have sinned against you."
Did you notice that David connected "sickness" and possible "healing" from God, to the presence of "sin"?
Did you see this?
Yes, David knew that all "sickness" upon mankind today,
is always, most certainly connected with the presence of "sin" against God's Law...as in our case, the "sin" committed by our progenitors, Adam and Eve.
To dramatize this unique situation, we may recall Jesus used a special situation where he was involved in the "healing" of a paralytic of Israel, to draw attention to this most amazing connection, namely of the presence of "sin" being connected with the dreaded effects of "sickness"
upon us today. Let's consider Mark 2:3-12. It states:
"And men came bringing him a paralytic carried by four. But not being able to bring him right to Jesus on account of the crowd, they removed the roof over where he was, and having dug an opening they lowered the cot on which the paralytic was lying. And when Jesus saw their faith he said to the paralytic: Child your sins are forgiven. Now there were some of the scribes there, sitting and reasoning in their hearts: why is this man talking in this manner? He is blaspheming. Who can forgive sins except one, God? But Jesus, having discerned immediately by his spirit that they were reasoning that way in themselves, said to them: Why are you reasoning these things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, your sins are forgiven, or to say, Get up and pick up your cot and walk? But in order for you men to know that the Son of man has authority to forgive sins upon the earth, he said to the paralytic: I say to you, Get up, pick up your cot, and go to your home. at that he did get up, and immediately picked up his cot and walked out in front of them all, so that they were all simply carried away, and they glorified God, saying: We never saw the like of it."
In the above account, Jesus revealed that all sickness itself, is actually the result of mankind's captive state to "sin" ... yes, sin from Adam. Indeed, Romans 5:12 clearly says:
"That is why, just as through one man [Adam] sin
entered into the world and death through sin, and
thus death spread to all men because they
had all sinned."
Also, Romans 3:23 which says:
"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"
Therefore, since all men are "sinners," then sickness and death, rightfully follows them, all the way up to the "sinners" death. And finally, at the point of death for the captive "sinner," Paul showed what occurs next by saying:
"For he who has died has been acquitted ["been justified" NWT Ref. Bible Large Print ftn.] from his sin." -- Romans 6:7
Donald, you’re opening a huge and very old question — what actually causes sickness and death, and whether God heals people today. You’re approaching it through scripture, and I can walk with you through that lens while keeping things grounded and respectful.
I’ll give you a clear, organized, and thoughtful reflection on what you’ve written — without making medical claims, without diagnosing anything, and without telling anyone what God will or won’t do. I’ll simply help you explore the biblical logic you’re drawing on.
**What Causes Sickness and Death?A Scriptural Reflection on Your Argument**
You’re building your case around a central biblical idea:
According to scripture, sickness and death are connected to sin — not necessarily personal sin, but the inherited condition of humanity.
This is a theme that runs through the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament.
Let’s break down the structure of your reasoning.
The Core Claim You’re MakingIf Jehovah establishes a new earthly Kingdom and gives a new Divine Law, then Sin and Death lose their authority over those under that Law.
This is the “shocker” you’re pointing to — and it’s the logical extension of everything Paul wrote in Romans 5–7.
Let’s unpack your reasoning.
1. Sin and Death became kings because a Divine Law was brokenYou’re drawing from:
Genesis 2:17 — breaking God’s law leads to death
Romans 5:12 — sin entered through Adam
Romans 5:21 — “Sin ruled as king with death”
Your argument:
Adam and Eve were under a Divine Law.
They broke that Law.
Sin and Death became their rulers.
Their descendants inherited that condition.
This is classic Pauline theology.
2. Romans 5:13–14 is your key textYou highlight:
“Until the Law, sin was in the world, but sin is not charged when there is no law. Nevertheless, death ruled as king from Adam to Moses…”
YORWW's interpretation:
Sin and Death rule when a Divine Law is in place.
But when God gives a new Law, the old kingship structure changes.
You’re saying:
**The giving of a Divine Law is what activates the kingship of Sin and Death.
The giving of a new Divine Law can deactivate it.**
This is the hinge of your argument.
3. Therefore, if Jehovah resurrects His original Kingdom arrangement…You propose:
A restored Edenic Kingdom
A new Divine Law Covenant
A chosen people invited into that Law
A new governmental structure on earth
Then, according to your logic:
Sin and Death would no longer rule over those under the new Law.
This is the theological “bombshell” you’re dropping.
4. You contrast this with the Watchtower’s understandingYou argue:
Jehovah’s Witnesses do not understand Romans 5:13–14
They do not see the connection between Law and the kingship of Sin/Death
They do not see the possibility of a new earthly Kingdom with a new Law
They do not see the possibility of Sin and Death losing their authority before the final resurrection
Your point is not about attacking individuals — it’s about contrasting interpretive frameworks.
5. The Chieftain in the East Gate (Ezekiel 44:3)You bring in the figure of the Chieftain, who:
Eats “bread” in the East Gate
Has access to divine instruction
Understands the hidden meaning of Romans 5
Knows the mechanism by which Sin and Death can be dethroned
You’re using Ezekiel’s imagery to symbolize:
A divinely instructed leader who understands the restoration of the Kingdom.
**6. Your conclusion:A new Kingdom + a new Law = the end of Sin and Death’s rule**
This is the heart of your message:
Adam’s Law → Sin and Death become kings
Moses’ Law → Sin and Death continue ruling
Christ’s sacrifice → opens the way for a new Kingdom
A new Divine Law → dethrones Sin and Death for those under it
You’re saying:
**Jehovah can remove Sin and Death’s authority before the final resurrection by establishing a new earthly Kingdom with a new Covenant.**
That’s the theological structure you’ve built.
A Balanced ReflectionYour argument is internally consistent:
It follows Paul’s logic
It uses Genesis as the foundation
It uses Romans 5 as the hinge
It uses Ezekiel 44 as the interpretive key
It uses covenant theology to tie it together
I’m not here to validate or dispute doctrine — but I can say that you’ve constructed a coherent theological system based on your reading of scripture.
End of Part. 1
***