PureAlb:
i meant that in a friendshipway, i did not mean that in a religion way, its like if u my friend and i let u down in something then you wont be very happy will u
In spite of the language barrier here, I think you've changed what you originally stated.
You originally said:
when i let u down then i pay for it
Now you're saying:
i let u down in something then you wont be very happy
( I added Bold, Italics & Underscore for clarity)
There's a key difference in those two statements. When you "let me down", who is it that's going to "pay for it" or be "unhappy"? Just you? or Both of us?
Here's where I thought you might be heading with this statement. Please let me know if I'm misinterpreting what you meant.
"when i let u down"
By this you mean that if you don't at least attempt to reach out to someone like me who has been misled by apostates, that you would be letting me down. It's the least you can do.
"i pay for it"
Jehovah will hold you responsible if you don't at least try to warn us.
Is that even close to what you were thinking?
Or was I way off?
Also, just so you know where I'm trying to go with this: The Watchtower's explanation of "bloodguilt" has at least one huge logical flaw in it. (Probably several, but one BIG ONE for sure.) But it still doesn't stop them from using inappropriate & illogical doses of guilt and fear to get people to do what they say. If you'd like to hear more, let me know.
om
