Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 08-14-2011 WT Study (RECOMMEND LOVE) (page 2)

ziddina

Oh, and Don't Place Literature...

I shall toddle off to your thread, also, after I've played about in this one...

I appreciate YOUR efforts, too!!

tenyearsafter

Thanks Blondie...I for one, enjoy your dissection of the WT articles. Frankly, it is the only way I could muddle through them, since the articles themselves bore me to tears!!

ziddina

"...Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah's Witnesses in association with God's spirit-directed organization? ..."

And the Watchtower organization is slowly raising the heat, boiling the poor little Rank & File JWs in their pot...

Yeah, that damn organization is more important than the "holy spirit", as you said, Blondie... [shakes head in dismayed disbelief...]

Hmmm... Paragraph 3... They seem to be establishing a dichotomous rhythm - legalism/love, legalism/love, legalism/love...

"... loving gift necessary? How could God offer it in a just, equitable way...individuals called upon to do to qualify for it?"

[I chopped the quote to hi-lite the legalism/love dichotomy...]

Blondie, you added:

"Is it no wonder that people like me are deceived. .."

And confused... 'Cause that legalism/love dichotomy - double-bind communication, really - confuses ME...

ziddina

" Why did Jesus not inherit sin through Mary, his imperfect mother? Didn’t she pass on her defective DNA? ..."

Ah, HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

Good one, Blondie!!

Of course, that demonstrates the New Testament writers' ignorance of basic biological functions.... They clearly believed in the male "seed" - that is, that the man's sperm contained miniature babies, and that the female's body was simply a fertile 'field' in which they would grow...

ziddina

"What is the sense of the Greek words underlying the expressions "declaration of righteousness" and "declaring of them righteous"? One Bible translator wrote of the concept: "It is a legal metaphor that makes a quasi-legal point. It speaks of a change in a person's status in relation to God, not of an inner change in the person... The metaphor pictures God as the judge who has reached a decision in favor of the accused, who had been brought before God's court, so to speak, on a charge of unrighteousness. But God acquits the accused." ..."

Blondie has already nailed the idiocy and weasel-words/sentences in this one...

But it demonstrates ever more clearly how LEGALISTIC the Watchtower Society has become... Some have said that the Watchtower is now being run by the lawyers, and this appears to be overwhelming evidence of that very situation...

Which play was it, in which Shakespeare said thru one of his characters, "First, we kill all the lawyers!" Of course, it was the villian - "Richard the Fifth Third", maybe? - who made that comment, but... One gets ideas....

hamsterbait

Blondie -

OXO

I've been reading your great analysis of the Witchtower study for almost ten years. Always good always relevant.

I now have the Yaddah yaddah virus that makes us skim and not comment.

Love

HB

ziddina

Blondie, I love the points you made about Abraham!!

He lied about his half-sister being his sister instead of his wife, was willing to push her into an adulterous relationship with Abimelech who desired her - and Abimelech was far more righteous than Abraham, for he hadn't LIED and hadn't PROMOTED ADULTERY to save HIS skin, as Abraham had...

But the bible declares Abraham "righteous"...

And then they have the unmitigated gall to speak of "capricious" acts... By HUMAN rulers.... [HUMAN rulers like the Governing Body, eh, Watchtower boys???]

Thanks again, Blondie!!

Slidin Fast

Thanks Blondie, well researched and thoughtful as ever. Did you notice the noo light/flip flop in p 11? All that about Jesus' loins busting with unborn billions is now officially discredited. I wonder if the son of God commited the sin of Onan to relieve the pressure. We have now reverted to one man, one sacrifice. Once again the advancing light just turns things around to what they were before the last advancing light on the subject.

If we were all in cars following our leaders in a convoy we would be constantly having to do U turns and broadsiding traffic coming the other way.

AnnOMaly

'One Bible translator wrote of the concept: "It is a legal metaphor that makes a quasi-legal point. It speaks of a change in a person's status in relation to God, not of an inner change in the person... The metaphor pictures God as the judge who has reached a decision in favor of the accused, who had been brought before God's court, so to speak, on a charge of unrighteousness. But God acquits the accused."'
COMMENTS
Which Greek words?
Who is the "Bible translator"? Can't find it on Google.

It's the same David J. William's book - p. 145. The French study edition had a reference to Williams after the quote.

Incidentally, the maverick French also left out the part about the Russian czars and hemophilia (I guess the French thought it superfluous to add that factoid). Vive la différence.

What was most irritating about the whole article was (and I know it's the same ol', same ol' but ...) Paul's running argument being carved up, resulting in the artificial distinction between two ways of 'being declared righteous' for two Christian groups - 'for life' and 'as Jehovah's friend' - when actually Paul used the example of Abraham's faith declaring him righteous as directly analogous to the 'anointed' Christians' (scripturally, there's no other kind) faith declaring them righteous! Yet somehow the WTS concludes that Abraham's being declared righteous is the same as a non-'anointed' being declared righteous, but different to the 'anointeds' being declared righteous! Crazy.

[End of rant.]

jmorgan74

Blondie,

You wrote:

"I can remember talking to man at the door who asked me what it meant in the Bible when it said “free gift.” I explained what I thought it meant using the Bible and he said to me, “then you are out of harmony with what your religion teaches. But your explanation is right.” That made me go home and research it and found that indeed my personal understanding did not match up with WT doctrine but I felt that the Bible supported me. I did not challenge the elders or others but thought that in time God would correct their view. Some years later, still a believer, I realized that this is another doctrine where the WTS speaks out of both sides of their mouth. Is it no wonder that people like me are deceived."

Just what was your explanation to that man and how did it contradict what the WTS taught/teaches?

Just curious,
Jack

Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 08-14-2011 WT Study (RECOMMEND LOVE)

Share this