jw, a thread for you and I...

AuldSoul

jw,

I realize it is impossible to expect that no one will post to this thread, and most threads don't survive more than a page or two before becoming sidetracked, but perhaps you and I can discuss whatever is on your mind in an "intelligent" manner in this thread. Maybe we could begin by requesting that this area be fairly undisturbed and at least that any additional posts to this thread outside of our discussion be of a statement nature and not distracting from the point by asking side-questions or hurling ad hominem.

First though, I would like some sense of what you consider to be an intelligent way to discuss issues.

Can we agree to try and avoid logical fallacies and argue only points we each feel competent to address independently? May I assume you have no objection to using the New World Translation as an authority?

In other words, I wouldn't even want to begin a discussion unless I know what you consider to be fair dealings in intellectual discourse. As I have said before, I believe you are sincere. I also believe you are reasonable in certain ways, but that you are easily offended.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

jw

First though, I would like some sense of what you consider to be an intelligent way to discuss issues.

Fisrt of all , let us agree to disagree in advance. So we don't waste a lot of uneeded rhetoric!

Can we agree to try and avoid logical fallacies and argue only points we each feel competent to address independently? Agreed.

May I assume you have no objection to using the New World Translation as an authority?

No objection, I perfer these to NWT.

Click here: Hebrew Bible in English / Mechon-Mamre Click here: Search for 'John 6:24' in the Greek/English Interlinear (tr) NT version

In other words, I wouldn't even want to begin a discussion unless I know what you consider to be fair dealings in intellectual discourse. As I have said before, I believe you are sincere. I also believe you are reasonable in certain ways, but that you are easily offended.

Yes very easily offended.

Respectfully,

AuldSoul

AuldSoul

Okay, jw, sounds fair. To what extent should I credit that you agree with JW dogma?

Should I argue as though you accept all JW dogma and find out as we go which bits you disagree with, to save time—with the understanding that you will let me know when I have attributed a belief to you that you do not actually have, simply because you profess to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses?

If you teach JW dogma, on what basis did you posit that John 6 is teaching "The bread and drink that is being referred to is representing biblical knowledge that one must seek!" I cannot find that interpretation of that Scipture in the WT Library CD-ROM. Is this brand new light? I read every occurrence on the CD and couldn't find the teaching that you put forward here. Where did that doctrine originate?

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

jw

Okay, jw, sounds fair. To what extent should I credit that you agree with JW dogma?

None, I do not agree with any of The organizations man made works. If if does not agree with biblical scripture you can agree that we will agree.

Should I argue as though you accept all JW dogma and find out as we go which bits you disagree with, to save time—with the understanding that you will let me know when I have attributed a belief to you that you do not actually have, simply because you profess to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses?

This will realy confuse you. I am A Jehovah Witness not a witness to the Jw organization!

If you teach JW dogma, on what basis did you posit that John 6 is teaching "The bread and drink that is being referred to is representing biblical knowledge that one must seek!"

Greek/English Interlinear (tr) NT) John 6:27 ergazesqe <2038> (5737) {WORK} mh <3361> {NOT [FOR]} thn <3588> {THE} brwsin <1035> {FOOD} thn <3588> {WHICH} apollumenhn <622> (5734) {PERISHES,} alla <235> {BUT [FOR]} thn <3588> {THE} brwsin <1035> {FOOD} thn <3588> {WHICH} menousan <3306> (5723) {ABIDES} eiV <1519> {UNTO} zwhn <2222> {LIFE} aiwnion <166> {ETERNAL,} hn <3739> {WHICH} o <3588> {THE} uioV <5207> tou <3588> {SON} anqrwpou <444> {OF MAN} umin <5213> {TO YOU} dwsei <1325> (5692) {WILL GIVE;} touton <5126> gar <1063> {FOR HIM} o <3588> {THE} pathr <3962> {FATHER} esfragisen <4972> (5656) o <3588> {SEALED, [EVEN]} qeoV <2316> {GOD.}

I cannot find that interpretation of that Scipture in the WT Library CD-ROM. Is this brand new light? I read every occurrence on the CD and couldn't find the teaching that you put forward here. Where did that doctrine originate?

John 6:27

Respectfully,

AuldSoul

AuldSoul

No, now that you have explained your position as a self-identified witness for Jehovah (small "w") isn't hard to understand at all. But then I am left wondering what doctrinal issues you have to discuss, since we will likely agree on much that the Bible teaches.

Permit me to begin by asking some questions to get the ball rolling.

(1) Do you believe in two separate classes of sheep who will attain to two separate rewards?

(2) Do you believe a Christian should pray to Jesus, their King and High Priest, and also to the Father?

(3) Do you believe it is disrespectful or improper to use an honorific instead of God's personal name when referring to him or speaking to him?

(4) Do you believe the message Paul took to Gentiles was about Jehovah or about Christ?

These should give us quite a lot of fodder to start chewing through intelligently.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

jw

(1) Do you believe in two separate classes of sheep who will attain to two separate rewards?

Are you referring to judgement day?

(2) Do you believe a Christian should pray to Jesus, their King and High Priest, and also to the Father?

No, They should pray through Jesus to Pray to Jehovah.

(3) Do you believe it is disrespectful or improper to use an honorific instead of God's personal name when referring to him or speaking to him?

No, But Jehovah has made it clear in the scriptures to honor his name,

(4) Do you believe the message Paul took to Gentiles was about Jehovah or about Christ?

Niether, it was a message from Jehovah for the Gentiles.

These should give us quite a lot of fodder to start chewing through intelligently.

AuldSoul

No, They should pray through Jesus to Pray to Jehovah.

So, if I understand you correctly, you believe all authority belongs to Jesus in heaven and on earth, (Matthew 28:18) that he is our King, our savior, our redeemer, our High Priest, (Romans 6-8 and Hebrews 5), and our mediator (1 Timothy 2:5)...but that we shouldn't ever talk to him and we can't have a personal relationship with him. Do you have a Scripture to support this view?

Under the position you posted, how does Jesus differ from a page boy?

No, But Jehovah has made it clear in the scriptures to honor his name.

Yes. But in my experience it does not honor my father to use his name frequently, at least he does not act as though I have honored him. Jesus honored his Father's name and used it...zero times as far as the Gospel record shows.

Niether, it was a message from Jehovah for the Gentiles.

I suppose you have yet to read 1 Corinthians chapter 2.

Are you referring to judgement day?

No. I am referring to two distinct groups of sheep who will receive two separate and distinct rewards. I didn't restrict the timing of those rewards or the interpretation of sheep. Since I don't know your how your dogma differs from Governing Body dogma, I am asking questions for your—hopefully—intelligent explanation of your viewpoints and beliefs. If these aren;t the issue that matter in your opinion, feel free to redirect the conversation to the issues you believe to be more important. I'll try to keep up.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

jw

So, if I understand you correctly, you believe all authority belongs to Jesus in heaven and on earth, (Matthew 28:18) and our mediator (1 Timothy 2:5

YES, To these scriptures.

AuldSoul

Still waiting...

jw

(1) Do you believe in two separate classes of sheep who will attain to two separate rewards?

no

jw, a thread for you and I...

Share this