How can scipture be used to dispute a JW when they alone understand it?

by The Dragon 13 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  The Dragon

  Another thing is all these years of debate and arguing over who's guess is actually correct...has gotten us no closer to any concrete answers. Just a big unproductive circle...with all parties holding one another back.

  Reminds me of a captured alien space ship complete with a instruction book...and everyone too busy arguing over who really understands the instuctions and should be appointed to drive it...to actually admit ignorance and come together, work together till understanding is achieved.

  Then worry about who should drive...perhaps then everyone could drive!

  But maybe that is the whole problem....everyone wants to be superior to everyone else instead of pursuing equality instead.
• 

  LanDi

  I don't believe it is at all possible, as many repsondents have stated. The Governing Body (Gods Wife and our mother) knows all and has told us to wait for them to clarify a point, rather than us reason it for ourselves (contrary to scripture incidentally). JWs always parrot the societies answer, which is kinda scary. No matter how well you voice your scriptural points, Jws will not understand it ( lifting the veil? ) and act as if you've gone off the subject, when they will indeed use something nothing to do with the subject at hand, usually a " core " JW scripture or a point from the Watchtower to prove they were right. And then they can always call you an apostate, no matter how well backed up your point is. Leave them to it, as Jesus said " Leave them be.Blind guides is what they are. If a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit.".

  There are none so blind as those who will not see !

  But then ............
• 

  The Dragon

  How does one become an apostate by asking questions?

  Or do you have to present your guesses as facts or truth that are contrary to theirs to qualify?

  What response would they have if you ask questions they cannot answer? Label you an apostate to keep from having to answer the question or admit ignorance?
• 

  Doug Mason

  As a generalization, the WTS reasons in reverse: it begins with the conclusion it wants to arrive at, then uses "supports" to substantiate its conclusion. (Much like politicians do before they set up an enquiry.)

  This can be seen by the often unrelated verses it cites at the end of a paragraph in the WT or any of its books.

  As another example, it starts out with the position that the word YHWH was used in the NT, and since the word is not there now, this "proves" it has been removed.

  At http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/Knight_jump_hermeneutic.pdf I have a picture showing how the WT's reasoning simulates the action of a knight in chess: it jumps from one color to the other color, ignoring all obstacles in the way. It moves like a knight, it thinks like a knight but it looks like a castle.

  Doug