Responding to "It's the truth because it follows the Bible, ..."

OnTheWayOut

"It's the truth because it follows the Bible, rejects the Trinity and Hellfire, engages in worldwide preaching."

I hear that from the JW's in my life. The last time, I challenged the aspect of a worldwide preaching work.
I said that the work is barely scratching the surface in 2/3rds of the world- Muslim, Hindu, Buddist lands.
The JW said that it was, he knew because the WTS told him so.

I switched to challenging the preaching as a proclaiming of the Good News. I said it was literature
distribution, not really offering good news, but slipping flyers under doormats and offering bizarre news.
That didn't go over well either. The JW said "The work is supposed to focus on good news from the Bible.
Many JW's have gotten spiritually lazy as the times get difficult and just distribute literature, but the message
is in there still."

So I need to adapt a new response to "It's the truth because..."

I will try this:
"If a religion is the truth because it follows the Bible, then I need it to not go beyond what is written. If the Bible
was never proven to contain God's name anywhere in the original Greek writings, then the true religion would not
decide that God didn't protect HIS WORD enough, so the religion must put the name there for him. If the Bible
doesn't go into the bedrooms of husbands and wives to dictate what kind of sex they can have, then the true
religion won't either. If you say the Bible does go there, then I would expect that you are saying the Bible claims
that sexual relations are for the purpose of conception, so the true religion would ban all sex unless it was for
husband and wife to have children- nothing else."

I am tired of the crap that they can decide what the true religion is, and I can't question it, so I will switch to using
their own standard and taking it to a point of ridiculousness. I am sure there are many more ways to do this.

isaacaustin

If the WT is the true relgion because they follow the Bible, for instance they take notice that the bible places birthdays in a negative light so they shun them...why does the WT not take notice that only 1 haircut was mentioned in the bible and this had disastrous results?

Superfine Apostate

checklist for the only true religion:

- does it follow the bible?
- does it reject the trinity?
- does it engage in worldwide preaching?
- does it's name start with "jehovah"?
- does it's name end with "witnesses"?

if you can answer all of these questions positively, you have found the truth. this list was compiled by a team of independent researchers who want to stay anonymous.

Georgiegirl

Ok this:

If the WT is the true relgion because they follow the Bible, for instance they take notice that the bible places birthdays in a negative light so they shun them...why does the WT not take notice that only 1 haircut was mentioned in the bible and this had disastrous results? is classic. I just spewed coffee all over my keyboard. Brilliant!!!!

isaacaustin

or if toasting is unacceptable due to its pagan origins- even if it is not intended to appeal to heaven for a favor it still MAY be viewed by some as such...why aren't wedding rings which have pagan origins also banned due to some who may view it as such?

WTWizard

Haven't they ever heard of "following too closely"? Suppose the Bible is wrong, either because one of the writers mistook something literally that was not meant to be taken that way, because the Church deliberately altered the Bible, or both? Now, if one follows it, they are not the truth because the Bible they are going by is faulty.

Worse, what if they are taking the Bible they do have and pulling snippets out of context? And they tampered with the Bible even further? I suppose that would make them the truth, just because they use the Bible to back them up. I could easily play that card and make attending one of their boasting sessions or going out in field circus a disfellowshipping offense--all I would need is the right scriptures, and voila! Going out in field circus is a serious offense for which one could be disfellowshipped!

james_woods

Well, I would ask "Whose Bible is it, anyway"? After all, it was the Catholic council in about the late 4th century that decided on the fraction of what ancient writings they had that would make up the official word. The same time they set up the Trinity doctrine, as a matter of fact. This was demonstrably done by "Babylon the Great" after early Christianity became "apostacised", according to JW doctrines. And NOT by the FDS or the real 144,000.

So, with that kind of history, how do they get off claiming that they alone have the true holy scriptures, or that the accepted scriptures are even right?

dawg

Answer....

I've found inconsistencies... Did you know that the "Proclaimers" book doesn't tell the truth about Beth Sarim, and I can prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt with both the book itself and 'Millions Now Living"? It was actually built to house the returning "worthies" who Ruhterford had predicted would come back to this earth in 1929. He actually deeded this mansion over to them and I can show you the deed... why did Rutherford falsely predict this comical prediction?

He, like Russell, was ignorant of the fact that Jerusalem fell in 586/87BC and not 607BC. The bottom line question is... are these men "God's channel of communication"... are they "God's mouthpiece" as they have claimed and thus questioning them is am act of apostasy towards God and or Jesus? Clearly not, some of their acts have been comical and if they'd been committed by other religions, then the JWs would have scoffed at it.

The fact is, they change dogmas constantly, even when I think they are wrong about a dogma and I know it, I can't openly say so without being dis fellowshipped for apostasy? Take your Bible and show me where it says that I must follow the dogmas of men and if I don't then I'm not serving God.

Why can't I come to conclusions about the Bible on my own without getting shunned by my family and friends? If they are right about trinity, hell, and the like, and wrong about other things, which they clearly are, does that make these guys any different than the clergy? Doesn't the fact that they change dogmas clearly illustrate that they can be wrong at times? Then why is it apostasy to see that they are wrong and not go along with it, to speak out when clearly they are wrong? Show me where the Bible says I must continue to teach and live by what I know to be wrong teachings to be approved by god.

The point I'm getting at is, we as individuals are supposed to have a personal relationship with God, and we must act on what we as individuals perceive as the truth... clearly they've gotten some things right about the Bible, but why must I teach known falsehoods just because some of what the JW say may be right? What about what I know to be lies like the proclaimers book on Beth Sarim?

dawg

Just remember, they are wrong about some things, and if they're wrong they can't be teaching biblical "truths" all the time... or at least not all they say is the truth.

Read them John 6: 52... it's clear that all should partake of the meal, in fact "if you do not eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you". "a any one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I shall raise that person on the last day".

Read them Rev chapter 7, where the great crowd is before the throne... what if they are wrong about these things?

I'm sure you know where they are wrong in your own words, don't let them get off the subject by finding three things they are right about, while letting them off the hook for all their comical errors. Remember the JW religion has done comical things, they obviously can be and have been wrong several times... this shows they are men, and thus fallible.

But stick to the theme that questioning men isn't an act of apostasy, make them show you where the Bible says this, it clearly doesn't convey that message.

TheListener

OTWO,

My wife always throws this conversation stopper out to me: "The Israelites were just like we are now. They were God's chosen people. They made mistakes like we do, they made corrections to their worship like we do and they followed Jehovah's orders, like pooping outside the camp and not eating certain foods, even though they had no idea why these laws were beneficial. Why do you have to nitpick the WTS so much?"

For arguments sake, I don't nitpick.

Any disagreement with the WTS is nitpicking in my wife's book.

We've developed a solid don't ask don't tell policy about the truth. I would like to overcome this particular thought of hers however.

I hope this doesn't derail your thread. If it does, I'll start another one.

Responding to "It's the truth because it follows the Bible, ..."

Share this