What are the most piercing questions I can ask?

by paul from cleveland 24 Replies latest jw friends

  • Terry
    Terry

    I've spent years pondering the question you asked and I have to tell you, there is only ONE question worth asking on which

    everything (EVERYTHING) stands or falls. It is the prime foundational argument. It is the basis on which all of the Jehovah's Witness

    mumbo jumbo rests.

    The question concerns : Source.

    The source of all theology, doctrine, chronology, policy, conditions, admonition and counsel is THE BIBLE.

    WHY, IF THE BIBLE IS THE INERRANT WORD OF GOD, have the original, hand-written (autograph manuscript) scriptures NOT BEEN PRESERVED?

    Why do we only have (not copies, or copies of copies) 4th century snippets, fragments, tatters, pieces of so-called copies (of copies, of copies of copies) to go on to PROVE what we believe??

    The majority of what exists in museums are generations removed from any pure, unedited, unexpurgated, un-tampered-with PROVABLE document.

    In fact, what translations are based on are certain version of late generation revisions of revisions of revisions of hearsay FRAUDULENTLY presented to the public as IDENTICAL to originals!

    Do you understand what I am saying?

    IF GOD DID NOT SEE FIT TO PRESERVE SCRIPTURE (original, autograph, pure manuscript inspired originals) it must be FOR A REASON.

    Think about it for a moment!

    The Catholic Church was absolutely obsessive compulsive about finding and preserving every holy relic, artifact, shroud, knuckle bone, splinters from the "true cross", etc. of every holy person they could find.

    WHY WOULD THEY NOT preserve the holiest of all documents on which mankind's true faith would rest too??

    It boggles the mind!

    You can't pretend GOD DID SEE FIT to preserve latter generation copies WHICH CONTRADICT other later generation copies and call it JUST AS GOOD.

    This is what modern day christianity tries to pass off as sound reasoning!

    Every church in Christendom that pretends the Bible is the inerrant word of God only goes so far as to assert the inerrancy is in THE ORIGINALS and not in the copies!!

    All we have are those very copies which themselves have selectively been tampered with!

    Why did the Watchtower see fit to translate THEIR OWN VERSION of the bible (New World Translation)?

    For the SAME REASON every other denomination produced theirs!

    Namely, to have a basis for their own proprietary INTERPRETATION to rest on something appearing to be divine!

    It is bait and switch, pure and simple.

    So,your question is this: HOW can you base your faith on "what the bible says" when we DON'T HAVE a pure, original bible in the first place?

    Think how many doctrines of Jehovah's Witnesses hang on one word or phrase!!

    We CAN'T POSSIBLY KNOW what the original word or phrase ACTUALLY WAS!

    There is no way to check---to match against the original-----we only have hearsay!

    How do you base a doctrine or theology that pretends to be THE ONLY TRUE RELIGION--on something that doesn't exist???

    Do you see how important this is foundationally?

    No PURE and exact scripture=No PURE and exact rendering or interpretation or inspiration.

    It is an intellectual dead end to insist that the Bible we have today is JUST AS GOOD as the original without any possible way of comparing it with a pure autograph original kept in a museum.

    What you have is the Watchtower Society claiming that false scriptures have been added throughout history (1 John 5:7 for example) for false religion to PROVE their false doctrines. Yes, this is true. BUT THIS PROVES THE BIBLE HAS NOT BEEN PRESERVED by God against tampering and impurity---doesn't it??

    Yes!

    False premise=False conclusion.

    Getting Baptised into a religion that bases their beliefs on specific words, phrases (scriptural citations) and interpretations of exactitude WHEN THERE IS NO PURE COPY OF THOSE WORDS in existence is assinine, intellectually dishonest and fraudulent.

    It will come down to willingness to be GULLIBLE. (i.e. they will call it "faith.")

  • undercover
    undercover

    In the same vein as Terry's excellent point is this:

    The JWs teach that Jehovah is God's name. They're whole identity as his witnesses relies on this name.

    Do some research on the origin of the name Jehovah and you'll learn that it is not the correct translation of God's name. Fact is, no one really knows for sure how God's name is pronounced.

    Yet, the JWs publish a brochure called "The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever". Here's the interesting part. In this brochure, the publishers, the WT Society, actually admit the error of the translation of the name Jehovah and admits that the true pronunciation is lost...though they do go on in some twisted logic to try to rationalize the use of the word Jehovah.

    A couple of things: If God was that powerful and really meant for us to use his name the way the JWs insist we should, wouldn't he have somehow have managed to actually preserve his name for all peoples to use? And on a lesser note, isn't it ironic that a brochure actually called "The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever" admits that the name actually has not endured...

  • Terry
    Terry

    the WT Society, actually admit the error of the translation of the name Jehovah and admits that the true pronunciation is lost...though they do go on in some twisted logic to try to rationalize the use of the word Jehovah.A couple of things: If God was that powerful and really meant for us to use his name the way the JWs insist we should, wouldn't he have somehow have managed to actually preserve his name for all peoples to use?

    Thanks, undercover. Your point is a specific RESULT of my argument! It is a pointed application!

    If you can't prove something because of the ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE it does little good to assert that

    you should do something anyway because absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

    One remarkable identifying aspect of logical rigor is consistency.

    The Watchtower Society cannot be consistent in any of their reasoning because they bump into the reality of non-provability. THIS is when they

    insist on Authority for themselves and Loyalty on the part of members in "relying on Jehovah".

    It is sleight-of-hand.

    1.No original documents exist to prove purity of preservation of scripture

    yet

    2.The Watchtower uses specific words, phrases, scriptural citations which are foundations for Watchtower INTERPRETATION

    yet

    3.Without proof an assertion is just that---an assertion

    therefore

    4.Inconsistently, the Watchtower switches to loyalty and their own Authority as spokesmen for Jehovah.

    Broken links in their chain of logic render it all totally ILLOGICAL.

  • paul from cleveland
    paul from cleveland

    It's too late now anyway. I received an email earlier today that read , in part, that she doesn't want to see anything "that could possibly show anything negative about the witnesses. I hope you understand." (emphasis her's)

    At first, I got upset and told her that I was just going to stop talking to her now because I couldn't stand waiting for the inevitable. Her requirement to cut me off because I'm disfellowshipped. But then, I changed my mind and sent her the text: "I'll talk to you. You know I can't stop loving you." After that she came to the gallery where I work and hugged me, told me she loved me and invited me to dinner.

    I hope she'll still talk to me even after she's baptized. Otherwise I'll just have one sister left.

    (sorry if I've offended anyone by posting part of her confidential email to me, I just felt that no one here knows her, and even if you know me, I have 4 sisters and it could have been any of them)

  • Judge Dread
    Judge Dread
    From my understanding, the poster is afraid of losing his relationship with his sister once she gets baptized into the cult.

    Paul is ASSUMING he will lose the relationship.

    I have known many that have kept their family relationships INTACT, despite the disfellowshipping of one party or the other.

    The sister in this case obviously does NOT want to hear anything negative about the witnesses. Persisting with the negativity will more than likely damage the relationship more than just letting her exercise her right to choose whatever religion she wants to join, this case being the JW's.

    Judge Dread

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit