Comments You Will Not Hear at the 4-24-05 WT Study (Self-Sacrifice) 3-15-05 (page 4)

This Week In Sophistry

This week the spotlight is focused on paragraph 17 and will cover, in more detail, many points Blondie has already mentioned but from the specific standpoint of how the lines of unreasoning are developed. I hope to demonstrate how a tiny bit of critical analysis can strip all covering from these paragraphs and leave the stark truth out in the open for anyone to see.

17 Displaying self-sacrificing love is not the easiest course to follow. But think of what it is that compels us. Paul wrote: "The love the Christ has compels us, because this is what we have judged, that one man died for all ... And he died for all that those who live might live no longer for themselves, but for him who died for them and was raised up." (2 Corinthians 5:14, 15) It is the love of the Christ that compels us to live no longer for ourselves. What a powerful motivation that is! Since Christ died for us, do we not sense the moral obligation to live for him? After all, gratitude for the depth of the love that God and Christ have shown us compelled us to dedicate our lives to God and become disciples of Christ.--John 3:16; 1 John 4:10,11

At the outset, you are invited to think of yourself as better than others. How? You have chosen a difficult course, whereas others who do not choose a course of self-sacrificing love, have an easier course to follow. Aren't you grand for even trying to live a self-sacrificing life?

According to Romans 6:23 (which any JW knows by heart) what is the penalty for sin? Death. What is the gift of God? Everlasting life.

Anytime you see ellipses, like in their quote of 2 Corinthians 5:14, 15, something is omitted. Nothing is ever omitted by the WTS on accident. What do you suppose is omitted? Was some lengthy portion of a Pauline rant excluded for the sake of economy? Actually, five words were omitted. Five very important words, as it turns out. The entire connotation of the verses changes when considered along with those five words.

2 Corinthians 5:14-15 14 For the love the Christ has compels us, because this is what we have judged, that one man died for all; so, then, all had died; 15and he died for all that those who live might live no longer for themselves, but for him who died for them and was raised up.

Who did Jesus die for? Paul says, "all." Who does Paul say had died? Again, the answer is "all." If all had died, who had sins? If this scripture indicates that we have some paying back to do beyond living as those who recognize Christ would live, why doesn't the context bear out the requirements?

Most importantly, as Blondie pointed out, who did Paul say we should we be living for? Christ. Not any earthly organization, and there was one at the time of his writing, just Christ.

Interestingly, focusing on the counterposing concepts of "die, dead, death, be slain" and "live, alive, lively, quick" sets a different tone than focusing on the contrasting objects lived for. Paul was not indicating that we cease living. He was not indicating that we live as slaves due to an act that indebts us to Christ. He was reminding us that Jesus, a human male, died for us. He ceased living as a human and was raised up as something else. His death, not our own, paid for our sins.

Were we born into eternal debt to God for this, or was this really a gift? According to Paul, it was a gift. (Romans 6:23) I can't remember ever receiving a gift that I felt obligated to repay. Well, except the conceptual gift of friendship.

What did Paul really say the love of Christ compelled he and his companions to do? Display self-sacrificing love? No. It compelled them to persuade others to accept this debt-free gift. (2 Corinthians 5:11) I really despise when scriptures are taken from context so that readers of the publications get confused over who is speaking to or about whom. Paul didn't say that the love Christ has compels all true Christians. He was speaking for himself and his companions. He was speaking to a congregation of true Christians and saying it to them, they were not part of the "us" he referred to.

Moving on, how does the WTS explain this compulsion? "Since Christ died for us, do we not sense the moral obligation to live for him?" I strongly encourage you to answer, "No, we do not," or at least, "I am not sure." Any question framed that way is an attempt to present the thinking of another as though it is your own. The sophist uses such a tactic to alienate you or include you based on your reply. The asker includes him or her self by default, and invites consensus from any who want to be part of that group "we," automatically excluding anyone who has a reaction ranging from uncertainty to disagreement. This preys upon the basically gregarious nature of humans in an effort to sway group thinking. It goes by another name you may be more familiar with: Peer Pressure.

I find it helpful to replace the consensus question asked with one I would never give an unqualified agreement to. For instance, "Do we not all have a desire to skewer and roast helpless little kittens over an open fire?" This keeps me from giving my reasoning processes over to anyone who wants to influence me based on inclusive/exclusive responses.

Last but not least, there is this beauty of a sophistic thought: "After all, gratitude for the depth of the love that God and Christ have shown us compelled us to dedicate our lives to God and become disciples of Christ." Beginning the thought, "After all," is very misleading. Thoughts opening that way presume consensus of the statement that follows as generally accepted reality. I know many people who did not come into this organization for those reasons, much less were they "compelled" by those reasons. I believe that every Witness knows many people who were not similarly "compelled."

I'm not so sure I would resist this comment if I was ignorant of an unstated reality. They teach that being a true disciple of Christ means willingly doing what the WTS instructs. Nothing in my Bible study has lead me to that conclusion.

This concludes "This Week In Sophistry."

Respectfully,
OldSoul

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 4-24-05 WT Study (Self-Sacrifice) 3-15-05

xjwms

OldSoul

Share this