JWs don't consider older WT as revelant

enoughisenough

I am relating this happening. I shared some thoughts from the 1989 question from readers concerning Christ being mediator between God and Man ( the WT spinning that he isn't ) and also the paragraph in that same article that plainly says: clearly, then the New Covenant is not a loose arrangement open to all mankind. It is a carefully arranged legal provision involving God and anointed Christians. I provided the scriptures to support that Jesus is our mediator and also scriptures to support the New Covenant is about forgiveness of sins for the many. I got this response back: I know that Jesus has given up his life for us all. A 34 year old WT is not going to shake my faith that this is the organization that he and Jehovah are using today. ....

So it was like that older article with it's false teaching means nothing because it is older, even though they still teach the same lies. This thing of "new light" and the older magazines being irrelevante has really done a number on the heads of JWs.

I had another person tell me that the older magazines didn't count because apostates had at one time infiltrated the society and they had to be cleaned out. I find it all disgusting...so glad I am out!

Ding

How do they know apostates aren't slipping lies into the publications today?

And isn't there a WT somewhere that says we can trust what the Watchtower says because the GB checks everything before it's published?

Or did apostates slip that in too?

Chevelle

So Old Light came from apostates and New Light comes from the GB 3.0 because Proverbs 4:18 says so.

This cult is getting more and more brain dead by the second.

ThomasMore

If you don't know where you came from, you have no idea where you are going. Such is the case with JW's now. Most have NO IDEA where they came from and have little interest where they are heading as a religion.

A news segment on the PA CSA investigation stated that WTC has argued in court repeatedly that elders are clergy.

Hmmm..... I recall when they taught that JW's HAD NO CLERGY.

They have no idea what they used to be and no idea what they are becoming.

enoughisenough

ThomasMore, I caught that point about the clergy and thought the same thing! It would be interesting to ask a JW if they have a clergy. If you had asked me, there would have been a time I would have said no.

smiddy3

Jehovah`s Witnesses don`t have a clergy class until they are in a court of law and asked a question they don`t want to answer and then they, all of a sudden claim clergy privilege.?

You can`t make this stuff up

smiddy3

Jehovah`s Witnesses have no Clergy until they are asked a question in a court of law that they don`t want to answer ,then they claim Clergy privilege .

????

Vanderhoven7

Enough

I would respond

So you acknowledge that this is what your organization taught in 1989 but now you are saying that this doctrine has changed.

Can you provide me a quotation from your literature that demonstrates that this teaching has changed? If not, I can't accept that this fundamental doctrine has changed.

If you say now that Jesus shed his blood for all then he shed his blood for you. So do you partake of the symbol of his blood at the memorial?

Why not? His blood was shed for the forgiveness of sin. Have your sins been forgiven by that blood? ??? Or does your death pay for all your sins so that you really don't need the blood of the New Covenant to be applied to your life?

If you are not in the New Covenant, under which Covenant are your sins forgiven?

punkofnice

the older magazines didn't count because apostates had at one time infiltrated the society and they had to be cleaned out

Looks like Jehovah's Chariot(tm), really isn't road worthy.

The mental gymnastics the Jobots do to justify their fake religion is stunning.

Ron.W.

The mental gymnastics the Jobots do to justify their fake religion is stunning.

👍👍👍

JWs don't consider older WT as revelant

Share this