Are they really that bad??? (page 25)

designs

Butterfly- I went the Church route after leaving the Witnesses, they are no better, same slavish mindset just a different address. 'No set interpretations' are you kidding, maybe in some non-Denominational kumbaya Church but the main ones all follow their Creeds. Try standing up in a conservative Lutheran or Presbyterian Church study group and advocate something other than the Weslyan or Westminster Confession and see what happens.

debator

Hi Bohm

The watchtowers and other publications are to support the Bible and they are never said to be inspired which means they do have to be refined all the time.

I have never denied this! The watchtowers refer us to the Bible and People can check for themselves if the correct interpretation or teaching is in line with the Bible's words or a bible principle.

Cultural points that need new issues (not specifically mentioned by the Bible) checked against bible principles and prophecy which needs checking to see if it is being fulfilled in the world around us can be changing all the time. They are both easy targets for apostates!

Do we just ignore these issues? that wouldn't be correct. As I said the publications among other things highlight new cultural issues that need to be held against basic Bible principles

I answered your questions but I just clarified them as well, which you didn't like since you are clearly either saying God's people are meant to be perfect which we are not. Or that we shouldn't use supportive literature which in it's uninspired state can have errors which happen. Since the Bible itself quotes from unispired books and highlights Christians being supportive with unispired writtings to each other I cannot see your point here either.

It is only anti-witnesses that make a lot of our publication changes and refinement which are a necessity for God's people. No modern day issue could be addressed if we didn't understand the issue of using Bible principles and prophecy would also be a non-starter.

Your agenda is in the examples you chose and your avoidance of our main Bible drawn teachings!

And by just sticking to prophecy and culture issues. I find this very slippery of you Bohm but Your not the only one on these that does this. These are common tactics on here. So I do not point you out as a special case you are only repeating what you have been taught from these sites.

jookbeard

debator;

if they say they are not inspired why are those who voice an opinion that differs from the WTS viewpoint on a particular prophecy disfellowshipped unscriptural for apostasy like I was and the hundreds on this forum like wise? and if the apostate viewpoint is accepted by the WTS at a later date like opinions I expressed and the apostate is kept in a shunned state all along then why is this so? one has to ask who the real apostate is? surely it is the WTS?

debator

Hi Listener

Thats exactly what they do. They have Never claimed inspiration for publications outside of the Bible. They have only ever said current understandings and they have always said they need refining constantly.

Giving credit to God for the ability to interpret and undertsand his words and apply his principles into modern cultural settings which is one of our publications functions. Is fine and not a sin.

Your accusations only fit if we do claim inspiration for our publications as Jehovah's witnesses this last 100+ years But we do not and never have claimed inspiration!

So stop trying to construct a claim and putting your own spin on the wording.

debator

Hi huffnung

Actually Pauls words do when he talks of "Creation" awaiting the firstfruits.

Since the Greek Scriptures is specifically dealing with the anointed who have the heavenly calling to be Kings and priests "Co-heirs" with Jesus to his Father then earthly hope would take a backseat but it is still referred. John in Revelation mentions it and Jesus does as well as Paul.

But I am still wondering why you keep slicing and dicing the bible into parts? that is not how it works.

Does a teaching only get credit by you if it is mentioned in a specific number of Bible books? and if not you feel you can happily delete it from the Bible?

Interesting way to address the Bible! I have never seen it as a Cut-n-Paste!

debator

Hi hoffnung

Interesting you quote heavily symbolic Revelation then try to say it is literal. "they will see his face" by your reckoning then the next part must be literal too. Will God then get indelible ink and write his name on their foreheads?

Apparently Jacob saw God "face to face?

Psalms talk about God turning his face away from them after a time when people could see/have his face towards them.

This is always used figuratively in the Bible so to apply literalness to it in revelation is extremely biblically dishonest.

designs

Hoffnung- Wrong, check with the RCC, Dallas Theological Seminary, and on and on, sorry buddy if you think Christians are going to spend their afterlife in Heaven. You need to get caught up on Christian Theology 101. The only out they give you is some ephemeral 'heaven and earth' become One, which by the way the Jews had you Christians beat on centuries earlier

debator

Hi butterfly

We are not meant to use the bible alone. We are supposed to be a flock learning together.

If you cannot even get that right what are your chances with the rest of the Bible?

OUTLAW

The watchtowers and other publications are to support the Bible and they are never

said to be inspired which means they do have to be refined all the time.....debator/Reniaa

The Bible Never Changes..WBT$ doctrine does..

The WBT$ uses the Bible to support any changes the WBT$ makes..

Using the Bible to support oppossing WBT$ Doctrines is Dishonest..

I have never denied this! The watchtowers refer us to the Bible and People can check for themselves

if the correct interpretation or teaching is in line with the Bible's words or a bible principle.....debator/Reniaa

JW`s cannot Disagree with the WBT$,without Fear of being DisFellowshipped..

Checking out whether the WBT$ is correct or not..Will only bring JW`s,"DISASTER"..

You should write a book called..

"WBT$ Bible Brain Farts" by Reniaa..

........................ ...OUTLAW

debator

Hi jookbeard

The principle of Division! applies. We are meant to be in agreement as a functioning flock.

You can see an example of this in Action in the Greek scriptures. When the apostles and Older men (shepherds) had to make a decision on circumcism of gentiles, not all agreed and had already started circumcising gentiles but this was creating division of teachings and had to be addressed. So they came to a group decision as the shepherds, that gentiles didn't need to be circumcised and enforced that decision which meant those that disagreed had to agree whether they liked it or not.

If you don't like this biblical fact of avoiding division and those who create them your argument is with the Bible not us.

If you want to see the fruitage of what happens to the flock when each person goes off and believes any old idea/teaching just look at Christendom! Fractured by it's constant changing doctrines and divisions.

Are they really that bad???

Share this