Arguing with witnesses on myspace.

by mkr32208 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  mkr32208

  There is a wealth of witnesses on myspace that are just itching for a fight! LOTS of them. Very ripe field! Little bastards have some attitude as well!

  Here's my latest pm back with this one. paradiseisgodsplan

  please, cognitive dissonance at its best.

  You say that you are gods chosen organization yet then you say you've been WRONG in the past. If your gods channel you wouldn't be wrong EVER. You might not understand but you wouldn't be WRONG. You can't give me that line about the "light getting brighter" the light gets brighter not righter. Jesus's followers were not teaching things that were WRONG they were merely off on the specifics. Jehovah's witnesses have TOTALLY changed their beliefs again and again. If you began teaching what the witnesses believed in the 80's you would be considered an apostate. Same with the 70's or 60's or 50's or whatever. THIS IS NOT HOW JESUS TAUGHT!

  Saying, 'well Jesus said his followers would be persecuted' doesn't fly. Your beliefs are totally WRONG this sets you up for ridicule and disdain. You then take that ridicule and say "were being persecuted" well no, no your not. Your simply believing ridiculous things and reaping the inevitable consequences of that. For example the scientologist believe that alien souls were transported to earth billions of years ago and dropped into volcanoes by spaceships that looked like D-9's. So they are ridiculed for believing stupidity. Does that make the stupidity RIGHT?

  You believe in a global flood. The evidence AGAINST a global flood is massive and incontrovertible. Therefore you are open to ridicule. That does not make you right.

  You believe that jerusalem was destroyed in 607. Any encyclopedia will easily show that it wasn't. There are over 10000 that's TEN THOUSAND stone documents from that time that clearly date that fall to 586/587. Not only that but if you add up the dates in your own books you will come to that date. But then 1914 doesn't work so they LIE to you about it. This sets you up for more ridicule. That doesn't make you right...

  You believe that blood transfusions are wrong. Based on the mosaic law yet you also believe that Jesus came to do away with that law so were not under that anymore. Also the blood was the SYMBOL of life. It was NOT more important than life. What was the punishment for eating blood if it was a choice between starvation and eating blood? You would be unclean until evening! What did Paul say about going out to the market and finding meat that wasn't bled right? He said "don't impose your conscience on others just eat it..." So your religion tells you you should lose your life rather than violate the SYMBOL for life in CLEAR VIOLATION of the bible. So your ridiculed. That does not make you right.

  Your beliefs are silly and easily disproved and that sets you up for 'persecution' that doesn't make you right...
• 

  Priest73

  Nice. Let us know the response. Most Witness kids wouldn't know what 607 B.C.E was if it bit them in the a$$.
  
  Take Care...
• 

  sweetface2233

  LOL...I didn't know what 607 BCE was till I joined JWD.

  Dude, add me to your myspace www.myspace.com/girliegirl794
• 

  bigdreaux

  Most Witness kids wouldn't know what 607 B.C.E was if it bit them in the a$$.

  too true.when my wife and i were talking to her sister about 607 and the united nations, she had no idea what we were talking about. neither did her ministerial servant husband. they believe simply to believe. so sad.
• 

  heathen

  I thought they were restricted from the web other than their own .org site . Anyway I search the groups from time to time just to see but usually nothing , mostly anti jw stuff if anything at all.
• 

  avishai

  MAybe you can gimme a hand on this site!! http://groups.myspace.com/witnesses
• 

  sweetface2233

  BigD, it is sad that some, and I would say it is a large number, do believe, just to believe.

  Back in July of 2007 my sister was telling me how close the end is and asked if I remembered the saying, "Millions now living will never die." She was saying how there are only so many people living in 1914 that could see the obvious changes in world conditions. She didn't even realize that she was defending a belief that, at the time, was NO LONGER a belief. My heart sunk at that moment and I knew that she was just "believing to believe".
• 

  Hope4Others

  And there probably counting time on this... Hope4Others
• 

  LouBelle

  Hope4others - you're probably right - I mean after all they are ministering - they way they do it has changed - like their beliefs
• 

  WTWizard

  I have some experience in arguing with witlesses on MySpace. Every time I (and about 20 others) have sound, backed arguments against them, they come up with the same stock arguments backed only by Watchtower littera-trash. And I can tear them apart with sound, backed logic (often taking them to other web sites that they refuse to visit). They still keep using the same stock arguments.

  I once posted a backed, logical argument against the witlesses on MySpace. I explicitly told them not to use the same stock arguments (I have already bashed them with logical, backed reasons why they are blatant lies) or to bash my counter-argument without first visiting the web site(s) I cite. All I wanted was for them to be forced to use logic (hey, if it's the truth, it should be easy for them to cite a backed counterargument that doesn't come from the same stock source). But, they could not come up with a sensible, logical argument (instead, they would keep reiterating the same stock argument that I, and 20 others, had just rebutted with backed answers).

  I continue doing it from time to time, but not so much to change the witlesses. What I really want to do is show the worldly people that the witlesses are not able to progress beyond the same stock answers, and that they will refuse to read the sources I present. All they need do is visit the site and present a logical, thought-out reason why my argument against them is fallacious and they won't do it. That should show the worldly people that read the arguments that the witlesses are on such flimsy grounds and will not visit those sites that are put up to back the attacks.

  No, I never just attack the witlesses with things like "Go to hell" and the like. I use counter-arguments, because "Go to hell" posts there just show the world that maybe the witlesses have something after all. But, when I tear apart a point that they repeatedly put up with backed, logical arguments, it shows the world that the witlesses are the specious group. And, they can follow my counterarguments in a more fully integrated, in-context fashion by going to all the web sites.