Anyone like me where you still believe in MOST of their doctrines?

by inquirer 72 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

inquirer

---Poztate---

It find it strange that you would want to cling to a religion that you acknowledge is corrupt.

Pronunciation: k&-'r&pt
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin corruptus, past participle of corrumpere, from com- + rumpere to break -- more at REAVE
transitive senses
1 a : to change from good to bad in morals, manners, or actions; also : BRIBE b : to degrade with unsound principles or moral values

I would hope by "taking in knowledge"? you might come to a realization that MOST or ALL of their doctrines are heavily flawed.

There are very few on this board who still think that they have gotten MOST things right.Those that do feel that still have problems when they try to defend their beliefs.

------

---inquirer---

As I said in the post before this, anyone can teach good things. It doesn't matter what religion it is. You just sort out "garbage ideas," and "good life-saving religious ideas," that according to me have been proven true. I can't deny that Bill Gates is one of richest people alive. It doesn't matter what I think of him, but his business is the most successful computer business ever!

A lot of people go on the "wrong reasoning" like that if the organization is corrupt, their religious teachings must not be true. This is very misleading to that particular person that follows through with this sort of idea.

I may not like their conduct, but if they teach something theologically true, I just keep that particular doctrine. If I see the truth in front of me, I can't say no do it. I can't say the sky brown, red purple, if it's blue.
LittleToe

I've only read the initial post, so I apologise if this post is disjointed from the thread.
I have difficulty believing ANYTHING the WTS taught me. I suspect that many of their doctrines are intentionally in contradiction with Christianity, perhaps for no other reason that to stand out as different.
The stuff which seems the most biblically based can just as easily be found in one commentary or another by some Christian author, so they truly have little unique (unless you want to shoot for the 1914 thing - LOL).
Poztate

As I said in the post before this, anyone can teach good things. It doesn't matter what religion it is. You just sort out "garbage ideas," and "good life-saving religious ideas," that according to me have been proven true.

I am sorry...I think I may have misunderstood you to start with. I thought you may have been thinking of going back to the WT ORG.
It is obvious you could never go back if you wish to tell the elders that some of their doctrines are"garbage ideas" You must realise with the WT it is all or NONE. They have unity (conformity) you know.
I wish you success if you decide to start your own new religion with most of the leftovers from the WT
inquirer

---Poztate---

Canada
As I said in the post before this, anyone can teach good things. It doesn't matter what religion it is. You just sort out "garbage ideas," and "good life-saving religious ideas," that according to me have been proven true.

I am sorry...I think I may have misunderstood you to start with. I thought you may have been thinking of going back to the WT ORG.

It is obvious you could never go back if you wish to tell the elders that some of their doctrines are"garbage ideas" You must realise with the WT it is all or NONE. They have unity (conformity) you know.

I wish you success if you decide to start your own new religion with most of the leftovers from the WT

___

---inquirer---

Thanks man! :) No worries. :)

I can't go back to the org. Because it's been PROVEN that they do get up to bad things like UN involvement.

Well... I hate to say this, but yeah... they are on the arrogant side! :(
Brummie

Whatever doctrine the WT teaches, there is always an alternative veiw. I found Edmund Gruss "Apostles of Denial" to be very interesting in taking WT doctrine and discussing alternative veiws. It kinda showed that the black and white thinking of the Watchtower wasnt healthy for me personally. Until you read alternative veiws, you have no way of being objective in the things that you believe.
The WT likes to think there are no alternative views, you have to believe thier interpretation or die! It is interesting therefore when they provide alternative veiws to their own previously held water tight doctrine. seperating Sheep & Goats, 1914 generation, the Wild beast is the un, etc....
dya get my drift?
People move at their own pace, I have made a complete turn around when it comes to WT doctrine, but it took me time, patience and an alternative view to get there.
moshe

I don't believe any of their doctrines- I studied with a Rabbi and found out why I was so confused by the NT Gospel teachings. Of course, I never bothered to ask any Jew what they teach about their Messiah, I just assumed that the Christian teaching about the Jewish Messiah matched what the Jews believed about the coming Messiah in the 1st century-NOT!
Shalom,
Moshe
JerichoForce

Inquirer
I will respond to the issues you raised in time, however some of the issues you raised, if you take up AshtonCA's challenge which he posted earlier, see below, that site answers all the issues you raised probably better than what I can, though I will have a shot myself as well because they are very weak and from what I can see quite simple to counter...
You mention that leaving out these verses is no big deal, I disagree...You might take this lightly our Lord doesn't, in fact He warned us that our name would be taken from the book of life if we add to or 'REMOVE' from his word. So to completely omit verses that nearly every other translation of the bible, including the KJV which is the most accurate of all the bibles decided should be included means they needed COMPELLING evidence to selectively exclude these verses, particularly ones not in line with JW doctrine. God's word is not something to take lightly or meddle with. Combined with the examples in the link from Ashton below it is pretty clear why they omitted those verses and why so many others are selectively mistranslated in the NWT in an attempt to take away Jesus identity as God almighty, not because of an alleged claim that they weren't in earlier manuscripts. If you look into their explanations for dropping the verses I mentioned there is a lot more to it than simply saying they weren't in some of the earlier manuscripts, to enlighten you I will be going through them one by one and demonstrating that the evidence that these verses were and always have been God's word is overwhelming
Inquirer, Here is a website for you about how inacurate the NWT bible is. We also thought it was the best bible out there until we started looking into it. Did you know that the WTS changed a lot of the scriptures to make them fit to their beliefs and teachings? This right here is why this organization is going to be done away with because the bible says not to add to the bible, take away from the bible change it in any way. I hope this website helps you see where maybe it's not best to try to gain all of your bible knowledge for the NWT.
Some feel that the KJV is the best and most accurate, but I find it hard to understand, so I prefer another one that is just as accurate, which is the NIV.
Here is the site. http://www.howellministries.com/nwtperversions.html
Let me know what you think after you read this site.
onacruse

Hello inquirer
I still believe that God's name is Jehovah,
A wonderful OT god, indeed...rates right up there with Baal and Ashtoreth.
his son is Jesus,
The unknowable god has an unprovable son. Seems to me that the Almighty could have done a better job in proving his point...or, at least, in vetting his own son.
no trinity,
That I agree with, except that the Bible says otherwise.
and he died on a torture stake
No, it was a crucifix; no significant historical evidence exists to prove otherwise.
I love reading the New World Translation, I believe it's the best one
The NWT is one of the most stilted supposed translations of the original languages that has ever posted its face on this planet. I'd rather read the KJ than rely on one word in the NWT.
but I love reading other translations too!
Now there, I totally agree with you!!
I believe that you are suppose to preach and then you don't see others doing it, except for Mormons and a few other kinds, but then again they believe in Joseph Smith and the cross (The Society did offer proof in my opinion anyway.)

But I don't think they Have "love," and they are a bit cold blodded and superficial when they ask about you.
And what constitutes "preaching"? Door-to-door? Why? Because of a couple of misinterpreted passages from Acts?
"A bit cold-blooded."
They're way beyond being just "a bit" cold blooded. They have liquid nitrogen for blood.
Respectfully,
Craig
Poztate

Thanks man! :) No worries. :)

I can't go back to the org. Because it's been PROVEN that they do get up to bad things like UN involvement.

Well... I hate to say this, but yeah... they are on the arrogant side! :(

Hey Good Guy I think we see things from the same side of the page
All the best to you...POZ
inquirer

---JerichoForce---

Inquirer

I will respond to the issues you raised in time, however some of the issues you raised, if you take up AshtonCA's challenge which he posted earlier, see below, that site answers all the issues you raised probably better than what I can, though I will have a shot myself as well because they are very weak and from what I can see quite simple to counter...

You mention that leaving out these verses is no big deal, I disagree...You might take this lightly our Lord doesn't, in fact He warned us that our name would be taken from the book of life if we add to or 'REMOVE' from his word. So to completely omit verses that nearly every other translation of the bible, including the KJV which is the most accurate of all the bibles decided should be included means they needed COMPELLING evidence to selectively exclude these verses, particularly ones not in line with JW doctrine. God's word is not something to take lightly or meddle with. Combined with the examples in the link from Ashton below it is pretty clear why they omitted those verses and why so many others are selectively mistranslated in the NWT in an attempt to take away Jesus identity as God almighty, not because of an alleged claim that they weren't in earlier manuscripts. If you look into their explanations for dropping the verses I mentioned there is a lot more to it than simply saying they weren't in some of the earlier manuscripts, to enlighten you I will be going through them one by one and demonstrating that the evidence that these verses were and always have been God's word is overwhelming

Inquirer, Here is a website for you about how inacurate the NWT bible is. We also thought it was the best bible out there until we started looking into it. Did you know that the WTS changed a lot of the scriptures to make them fit to their beliefs and teachings? This right here is why this organization is going to be done away with because the bible says not to add to the bible, take away from the bible change it in any way. I hope this website helps you see where maybe it's not best to try to gain all of your bible knowledge for the NWT.

Some feel that the KJV is the best and most accurate, but I find it hard to understand, so I prefer another one that is just as accurate, which is the NIV.
Here is the site. http://www.howellministries.com/nwtperversions.html

Let me know what you think after you read this site.

___

---inquirer---

It makes me sad that people are so obsessed with the King James Bible, even though it's been proven beyond insanity that it's no good anymore. Oh, if King James did something, it must be alright. If the JW's do something it must be bad. Those 2 statements are just ludicrous!

I have looked at this site before... I think they are just translating it better! I don't think they are adding! I think the Catholic Church and the Mormon church add books to the Bible, why won't you criticize them? CAn you read that stupid King James Bible? You might have to walk into "word historian on English" to understand what it means.

I am not closed minded. I am open minded on a lot of things. So unless someone can prove otherwise, why should I say bad or negative things about the NWT?

I put up a web link from 2 sources saying that the NWT is a "remarkably good translation!" But everyone ignored that post!

Anyone like me where you still believe in MOST of their doctrines?

Share this