Are You Paul or are you Saul?

by reniaa 347 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  isaacaustin

  perhaps Spike...point taken...to be considered. thanks
• 

  TD

  Just perhaps, practicing loving-kindness could to be warm and friendly, diplomatic and humble, even appealing and uplifting, right?

  LOL Spike. Good advice, but in view of the fact that there are a number of board participants here who are Catholic, do you feel that describing the Papacy with terms like, "Unscriptural title," "Phoney claim," "Heresy" and "Lying assertions" is really a warm and friendly, diplomatic, humble and appealing way to speak in front of Catholics? If you are a practicing JW, isn't the ultimate goal conversion rather than offense?

  I know that emotions run high in religious discussions and everybody tends to throw around disparaging terms. But it seems to me that neither side in a disagreement can ask for respect unless they are first showing it themselves.
• 

  Black Sheep

  May I gently suggest that labels such terms as "indoctrination" and "trapped in a cult" and "preaching a false gospel" seem to be harsh, unloving, mind-closing accusations, much as it would be if someone called you a "bigot"!

  Truth hurts.

  Deal with it.
• 

  DaCheech

  russell, rutherford, knorr, franz, jarasz.......... you're all still false prophets
• 

  Spike Tassel

  • To TD (Post 1884): Loving-kindness has sometimes meant stating the truths that others may not have had the courage to speak out on. Mythology and fantasy and fraud, whether religious or secular, always need to be exposed and opposed. Remember that even Jesus used terms like "whitewashed graves" to particular audiences in particular instances. There is a context to everything. There is a time and a place for chastisement and rebuke, and one for consoling and tenderness. It depends on what is needed to take people's minds off of themselves, and onto the Kingdom message in all its forms. It's about loving the sinners and hating sin.
  • To Black Sheep (Post 2525): May I always consider the source of the claim of truth, and treat it accordingly.
  — Spike Tassel.
• 

  TD

  But Spike, the idea that it's perfectly okay for Jehovah's Witnesses to criticize the beliefs of others in offensive, disparaging terms, but it's not okay for others to criticize the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses because that makes them comparable to Saul prior to his conversion is the very essence of what people have objected to in this thread.

  You can rationalize it if you want; you can claim that it's done in the name of "loving kindness" or that it's okay because you sincerely believe that your side happens to be the one that's right; or that it's okay because Jesus condemned many of the teachers of his day.

  But if you cannot see that those exact same excuses are equally valid when they come out of the mouths of those that disagree with Jehovah's Witnesses than you are adding a certain legitimacy to some of the terms that you have objected to. That obvious a double standard is commonly associated with cults.
• 

  DaCheech

  shhhhhhsh, reniaa is waiting for someone to talk trinity.

  false prophets have no right to make rules.
• 

  DaCheech

  shhhhhhhhsh, I hear the crickets
• 

  Yizuman

  shhhhhhhhsh, I hear the crickets

  You called?
• 

  DaCheech

  i saw her on another thread