Reading the Bible without JW "aids"

easyreader1970

Someone a week or so ago posted a link to a youtube channel by the ex-Gilead Bible School Guy (sorry, I know ex-Gilead Bible School Guy is not his name, but I forgot what it was).

Many, many people have had the "light bulb" go off after they have read parts of or all of the Bible without using the WBTS "research" material. Some of these people think that the JWs have a twisted understanding of the Bible and others come to the realization that the Bible is just a made up book of stories.

Either way, reading the Bible on its own helps you to see that JW's have it all wrong no matter how you slice it up. And you can see that even if you read their own heavily altered NWT Bible. (Which reminds me: Why does the WBTS always say that they don't have their own Bible, but clearly they do?)

I wish I could get my wife to do that. I even suggested it one time. She thought I was crazy. "Why would I do that?" was her Borg-inspired response.

er

leavingwt

I agree. Simply reading what was written in the Book of Galatians helped me to see that Watchtower is not a Christian organization. The Apostle Paul counsels the Galatians for being guided by Law. Sound familiar?

Plus...in another thread, one of the former Gilead or MTS guys highlights that the Society's official position is that the Bible is a mystery, a puzzle, and that only they can explain it. This gives them an out, if you will. If someone (God forbid) actually reads the Bible and finds a discrepancy between the text of the Scriptures and the Watchtower dogma, the elders can remind the person that only the Slave can interpret and explain Scripture.

They have all the bases covered. Any respectable cult will do this.

Awakened at Gilead

You know my name now... yep, the FDS is the only one that is allowed to interpret the Bible.. if someone else tries, its pride... runing ahead of the chariot.

I try to make it clear that I am not advocating my personal interpretation, but the problem is that the FDS only interprets the Bible from one angle without taking any possiblities into account that question their spin.

http://www.youtube.com/user/ExGileadMissionary

wobble

My super-Dub sister came out with that load of bollocks on Sunday when I was visiting my Mum,(she lives with them)that you need someone to explain God's Word to you. Where do they get that from? I cannot think of a single scripture that would give you the idea that you needed another man to explain it to you,unless he was Jesus.

She then came out with this amazing bit of circular reasoning and cognitive dissonance all in one:

"Nobody who has read the Bible on their own has come to the same conclusions as the FDS"

Can you believe that? She said it and thought it proved her point!

Love

Wobble

sir82

you need someone to explain God's Word to you. Where do they get that from?

Where they get it from is the account is Acts where the Ethiopian eunuch is reading Isaiah and doesn't get it. He tells Phillip "How could I ever understand this unless someone explained it to me?"

Of course, it is a leap of several million miles to go from the above account to "We the GB have the only possible correct interpretation of the scriptures, and if you don't believe us, you are deserving of death and Jehovah will melt your eyeballs and have worms eat your tongue."

wobble

Cheers Sir82,

I can see they will use something like this,but you only have to think about the context.a jewish proselyte who knew nothing of Jesus,to see that it does not fit todays circumstance,and when you think of Pauls words about not listening to anyone who comes to you with more than he preached,

"Christ impaled"

then any interpretation that adds an idea must be going beyond what is written.

Love

Wobble

Narkissos

Part of the problem is that the typical JW use of the Bible mainly consists in quoting isolated verses in reply to non-Biblical questions, not reading the texts... as a result the average JW knows a lot more Bible references than the average churchgoer and easily "wins" in thematic discussions, but his/her understanding of Biblical narratives (e.g. in the Gospels) and arguments (e.g. in the epistles) is considerably lower.