NEW YEAR STRATEGY: CHOOSE your BATTLEGROUND carefully!

by Terry 15 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Terry
    Terry

    Abraham Lincoln was once challenged to a duel to the death when he offended somebody.

    As the one challenged, it was his right to pick the weapons and the place of battle.

    Lincoln's challenger was a short fellow and an expert marksman. Lincoln was 6 feet 6 inches tall and had been a rail splitter as a youth.

    Here is Lincoln's response:

    "I choose axes in 6 feet of water." His challenger never showed up.

    If you choose the wrong battlefield you fight with your opponent's strengths used to his advantage.

    NEVER CHOOSE THE WRONG BATTLEFIELD. Such as.....Doctrines.

    Arguing doctrines is like punching a cloud.

    You may as well write your rebuttals with your finger on the calm surface of a pond.

    A false PREMISE cannot be accepted into evidence as legitimate or you are defeated before you've begun.

    Hannibal defeated the formidable Roman army again and again and again. How? He chose the terrain on which the battle would take place.

    The Romans finally got wise. They simply refused to engage! Then, they sent their armies to attack his home town in Carthage.

    The Romans chose the terrain. They were waiting for him when he arrived. He lost. His first and only defeat!

    What is my point?

    You have to realize that what Jehovah's Witnesses are doing is a series of Magic Tricks using misdirection.

    You won't catch them out palming the coin. You won't see the wires when they float their lovely assistant above the floor.

    An audience to a Magic Show accepts the premise and agrees to be fooled. The titillation comes from not KNOWING HOW the trick is done.

    You cannot destroy the illusions of the Watchtower Society by reporting about "how the trick is done".

    Why?

    The audience wants to be fooled expertly. They want to believe in Magic!

    You, by believing THE BIBLE CONTAINS CORRECT DIVINE TRUTHS are like that audience. You believe in Magic.

    For every trick you expose, the JW's have another way of performing that trick!

    There is NO SUCH THING as Magic!

    The bible will not stand as evidence of Divinely revealed Truth----IF YOU take the time to investigate.

    Jehovah's Witnesses have their own INTERPRETATION of Truth.

    You cannot defeat them by pointing out a DIFFERNT interpretation.

    All that is MAGIC.

    Choose your battleground. Don't fight in Magic land.

    The only battle worth waging is against the PREMISE of Jehovah's Witnesess. No, not their Interpretation---the BIBLE ITSELF!

    1.Nobody has any original manuscripts of the bible. They don't exist.

    2.Nobody has copies from the original autograph bible manuscripts. They don't exist.

    3.A fragment about the size of a postage stamp of a copy of a copy of a copy exists. That is all!

    4.Actual manuscripts appear decades after the originals vanished. These actual manuscripts cannot be VERIFIED by comparison to ORIGINALS. Why not?

    (see #1 above)

    5.The manuscripts which do exist, having appeared decades later, have no Provenance. We don't know who produced them, who owned them, who changed them, who passed them along. All we have are unsubstantiated CLAIMS.

    6. 300 years after the death of Jesus there were thousands of versions of Jesus stories in existence. Not one ACTUAL conversation in Jesus' own words has been faithfully preserved anywhere to serve as evidence. All we have are redacted "versions" of word-of-mouth stories.

    7.Thousands of manuscripts exist which are not original. When you compare them with each other thousands of mismatches can be easily demonstrated.

    Are any of the above 7 points cause for FIRM CONFIDENCE we can battle with each other over what is TRUE TEACHING?

    What you call THE BIBLE consists of "attributed" writings. None of the writers can be proved in any way. So, how can anybody's INTERPRETATION by considered "The Truth?"

    Jehovah's Witnesses, like the Catholic Church, create a fairytale explanation of how TRUTH is channeled through them. But, like the Catholic Church, all evidence testing their True interpretation has DISPROVED those claims!

    How many errors does it take to prove GOD did not author a false claim?

    If you are God's chosen channel of communication, HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN YOUR ERRORS?

    The disease is not the false claims easily disproved. Those are the symptoms of the disease.

    The disease is ACCEPTING THE BIBLE as a source of divine evidence in the first place.

    Don't fight on that soggy battlefield. You will lose even when you win.

    Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura have been tested by history for over 500+ years. These are false doctrines. Every denomination contradicts every other denomination for only ONE reason: THEY ALL USE THE BIBLE to prove their doctrine!!

    Study the history of the bible and ONLY fight about that. All the rest of Jehovah's Witnesses false claims vanish after that.

    The only defense any christian has ever made about the bible is a lame one: Surely God can preserve His word if he wants.

    The Catholic bible was ALL THE BIBLE THERE WAS for 1500 years. It had 7 more books than what we have now. Where is the Corruption disproved? In what is missing or in what has been preserved?

    Luther argued against including Hebrews, Revelation, Jude and James. The JW's think Luther was one of them!

    Who was right and who is wrong? THERE IS NO WAY TO TEST for/against corruption.

    The hard-nosed evangelical Fundamentalists who insist the BIBLE IS WITHOUT ERROR.....only do so.........by cheating! They pull a little dishonest trick, just as the Witnesses do. Do you know what it is?

    They affirm Inerrancy in the "originals" only!!

    Where ARE those originals?

    Nobody has them!

    Wiki:

    Evangelical inerrantists

    Evangelical Christians generally accept the findings of textual criticism, and nearly all modern translations, including the popular New International Version, work from a Greek New Testament based on modern textual criticism.

    Since this means that the manuscript copies are not perfect, inerrancy is only applied to the original autographs (the manuscripts written by the original authors) rather than the copies. [1] For instance, the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy says, "We affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture." [22]

  • Terry
    Terry

    "Unicorns" have gold horns."

    "No. Unicorns have brown horns."

    "No. There are no such things as Unicorns."

    "No, you are ALL wrong. The bible doesn't say what color the unicorn's horn is."

    (Job 39: 9–12; Ps. 22. :1, Ps. 29: 6; Num. 23: 22, Num. 24: 8; Deut. 33: 17; comp. Ps. 92: 11) KJV

    Job 39:9-12

    King James Version (KJV)

    9 Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?

    10 Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?

    The above argument is about as stupid as ANY argument over ANY scripture.

    There is no "there" there. You'll end up comparing translations, interpretations, etc.

  • cantleave
    cantleave

    Terry - awesome post, you make the point eloquently.

  • Terry
    Terry

    Jehovah's Witnesses HIDE BEHIND THE BIBLE.

    The insidious teachings of the Watchtower Religion are ONLY HUMAN OPINION.

    This only becomes clearly visible if you -----------------AVOID---------------------------the mudwrestling over scripture vs scripture interpretation.

    That is sideshow.

    That is diversion.

    That's a loser.

    When Galileo was called before the Inquisition about his observations through his telescope proving the Earth moves around the Sun--what happened?

    Did the Catholic Church actually consider the evidence?

    No. The Church declared the telescope to be an invention of SATAN!

    They flexed their Authority by showing Galileo the instruments of Torture.

    Is this an honest argument?

    The Catholic Inquisition was DEFENDING THE FAITH! Doesn't that sound noble?

    But, what was it really??

    It was the Church's OPINION about a book without credible content and no evidence to support it. (THE BIBLE)

    Moral of the story?

    Facts and Evidence do NOT stand a chance when you are up against bible authority.

  • Mad Sweeney
  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    I agree that arguing doctrine is generally pointless, but that is because I don't personally believe the Bible is inspired. Having said that it can't be denied that many thousands have left the Witnesses primarily over doctrine, with questions such as whether Jesus is the mediator for all Christians, faith or works for salvation, the Trinity, the divine name in the NT, chronology, and so on being popular points of departure.

    Here's a question for you: if someone could be convinced to leave the Witnesses if you argued with them that the Trinity is true, but could not be convinced to leave if you argued the Bible is not inspired anyway, then which would be the kinder way to proceed?

    The Catholic bible was ALL THE BIBLE THERE WAS for 1500 years. It had 7 more books than what we have now.

    There were the different orthodox churches that had their own biblical canon's too.

  • Violia
    Violia

    Thanks Terry for posting . Any scribe ( with his own agenda) could have changed the words of the Bible , which probably explains why you can use it to prove anything.

    Can you suggest some books that are not heavily detailed to read ? I have Karen Armstrong's book " The Battle for God" and it is wonderful but even it challenges me due to my attention span. It is about as heavily detailed book as I could handle. I have ADD and need a user friendly book. any suggestions ?

  • Terry
    Terry

    Here's a question for you: if someone could be convinced to leave the Witnesses if you argued with them that the Trinity is true, but could not be convinced to leave if you argued the Bible is not inspired anyway, then which would be the kinder way to proceed?

    I would always admit up front that I'm just a person with an opinion and not an expert with grasp of the absolute.

    For every on thing you remove from a belief system one thing has to replace it.

    Otherwise you leave a gaping hole the size of what left.

    If you can get somebody to acknowledge it is ALL opinion you are well on your way to sanity.

  • Terry
    Terry

    Can you suggest some books that are not heavily detailed to read ?

    Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman. Start there.

  • Timothy Riches
    Timothy Riches

    This is a great post, Terry!

    I usually don't throw videos out there, but htis 2-part video by Evid3nc3 deals with this topic compellingly, and is based on insigghts gained through reading Karen Armstrong's book and others by Ehrmann, Shelby and Spong.
    Part one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg

    Part two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPfFx9JTQl8

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit