Watchtower use of scriptures is this. They take one scripture word by word and say we have to follow it to the letter, and if another scripture doesn't match their narrative, "well it doesn't really mean that"
PIMO reverse witnessing samples presentation #1: Earthly hope
by neat blue dog 26 Replies latest members campaign
-
-
neat blue dog
Drearyweather:
I understand what you're saying, but the two are mutually exclusive. No one in the Bible was ever baptized and DIDN'T get the spirit. No one was ever a Christian and DIDN'T get the spirit. Besides, most JWs I guarantee wouldn't even know the official dogma you just mentioned, and would just see the word "baptized".
-
Drearyweather
No one in the Bible was ever baptized and DIDN'T get the spirit. No one was ever a Christian and DIDN'T get the spirit.
Actually, there are two baptisms mentioned in the NT. Baptism by water which Jesus commanded in Matthew 28:19, 20. This water baptism was to be given by one believer to the other. Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize new ones.
However, Spirit baptism or the heavenly calling was exclusively done by God, not by any human.
Besides, most JWs I guarantee wouldn't even know the official dogma you just mentioned, and would just see the word "baptized".
Yes, many would not know it. So you can tap on the ignorance of JW's to reverse witness them.
-
Crazyguy
You have to remember that when you do this the fall back excuse the elders use is that the New Testament was written for the anointed. That’s how they get around these facts that blow up thier doctrine.
-
Magnum
Thanks. Interesting. Have never connected those passages the way you did. When (and if) things slow down in my life, I want to read the Bible cover to cover without the JW bias and see what conclusions I reach. I'm making a note of the way you connected these passages.
This, to me, at the very least, shows that doctrine is not as simple and clear as JWs think.
-
neat blue dog
Drearyweather
Yes, the different 'baptisms' can be at separate times, but what I mean is: No one in the Bible was every permanently deliberately partaking in only one baptism, they would be baptized with both and spirit at some point, not just water because they 'have an earthly hope'
-
neat blue dog
Crazyguy
the fall back excuse the elders use is that the New Testament was written for the anointed
Agreed. The point here though is to destroy some of the few scriptures that they say apply to the earthly hope. If there are none left, what's the excuse for believing it at all? The point is to show that only heaven is ever mentioned, even in scriptures the WTS says are talking about earth.
-
neat blue dog
Magnum
I want to read the Bible cover to cover without the JW bias
That's exactly what I allowed myself to do in summer 2016 and it changed my life. Up to that point had been depressed and confused, but after that it was all so clear, I didn't need to ignore my doubts, but accept them, and I was fully PIMO from then forward.
-
StephaneLaliberte
nowwhat? : Watchtower use of scriptures is this. They take one scripture word by word and say we have to follow it to the letter, and if another scripture doesn't match their narrative, "well it doesn't really mean that"
Don't all religions do that? Even those who believe in the Coran? Those holy books contradict themselves at various places. Yet, religions teach that they don't and end up with various views of the same content. Surely one verse was literal and the other figurative.
No... the document that made its way to is simply contradicts itself.
-
waton
re: Baptism into Christ: That is why the wt formula for water baptism does deliberately not follow the biblical instruction "--In the name of the Father, the Son (Christ) and the Holy Spirit:
re: Covenant. The New Covenant would apply to all, just like the Law Covenant applied to all. John 6 shows that one has to partake to get everlasting life, not immortality.
wt thinking is, that the heavenly class has to sacrifice, give up, (like Jesus did) that right to earthly life ( acquired through partaking) to later gain immortality. That reasoning still means that all should be partake. and
of course Jesus passed the emblems to people with an earthly hope. Only later, after he had quelled their fight about who was the greatest, did he again mention the kingdom covenant to them.
The New Covenant is not the Kingdom Covenant.
Even as a communal meal, stripped of it's "talking snake" content, all should partake. There never should be partial partaking
not endorsing, just observing.