Posts by Check_Your

First off, let me specify what I mean by a Christian or group of Christians. "Everyone believing that Jesus is the Christ has been born from God" (1 John 5:1). I am sure Christians will disagree about a great many other things, but all Christians believe this.

But what should a Christian do when someone else professing to be a Christian is teaching things we disagree with outside the above criteria?

Before I try to figure that out, let me say first that any conclusions are my own. If someone does not agree with them, I only say that "I disagree". It is my opinion that ideally, the strongest a person should say against another's opinion is "I think you are wrong" instead of "you are wrong". For the former carefully designates the matter as of opinion, whereas the latter implies a final judgement and authority that neither of the two folks posses before God. Again, what I describe is the ideal. There are cases in the real world where the truth of the matter is so obvious, or one person is in clear and necessary authority over the other. I am not speaking of those cases but rather I am speaking of the differences that so many who profess belief in the above assertion of Christianity find to divide themselves from other fellow believers. (need verse on not causing divisions)

Back to the subject of criticizing fellow believers of the first assertion. I, personally, see no need to spend alot of time pointing out what everyone else is doing wrong. I don't think any aspect of Christianity requires it. In fact, I think we are all supposed to keep working on that beam in our own eye before we go looking for specks in other's. (Matthew 7:1-5)

But what of the Christian who is professing teachings that we beleive are genuinely false?

Naturally we have an obligation to uphold what we beleive to be the truth. So what is the best way to go about doing that? The simplest way to do that would be to explain your position. Assuming everyone involved only seeks truth, this should be a beneficial experience for everyone. If the person you disagree with is right, you will learn something. If you are right, you can take comfort that your beliefs have withstood scrutiny and are therefore that much more worth putting your faith in.

But what if the exchange results in a continued disagreeement.

Whenever we have someone disagree with us it is always a little uncomfortable because it is evidence that we might be wrong! Now if we put that possibility out of our minds, the next conclusion we can draw is that either the other person is ignorant/illogical or they don't want to know the truth. Now I believe that we are to do unto others as we would have done to us. (need golden rule verse) I would prefer that given the choice, a person would presume that I was ignorant rather then hiding from God's truth. I therefore choose to presume the same of others.

And even if in a moment of weakness, I choose to beleive that they are hiding from God's truth, it is another thing altogether to level it as a charge

. What purpose could it possibly serve to do so. It will not likely change the person's position. It may discredit the person's position in the eyes of some, but it ultimately has no bearing on who actually is or isn't right. I, personally, have found that when a person feels they have to speak of someone as somehow less, that is because they feel that is the only way they can make themselves seem greater. To do so seems unnecessary if one is confident in their position or their argument's validity.

I think it is enough to simply state your case. If for some reason you feel that is not enough, I suppose it might be worthwhile to point out what is wrong about the other person's case. I never see any legitimate reason for speaking against the person.

The most extreme position one Christian can take against another is to say they are not of God, but of Satan because they disagree in matters besides their shared belief in Christ.

The first thing I would notice is that such a statement would lack humility. I also would ask what purpose is served by saying such a thing. Will saying such a thing make it more or less likely to change their mind? I don't think so. Since our ultimate goal should be to change their mind, isn't such a thing counterproductive? What will it do in the minds of those who agree with us or those who aren't sure? For many it will cause them to discount the other out of hand, without considering the accused's position at all? If we feel the need to level such a charge, does it show confidence in the strength of our own ideas? Do we not think our ideas can stand on their own? Are we afraid people might believe the other guy unless we label them as despicable?

Of course, I would not want someone else saying such things about me, so as a Christian I choose not to say such things about them.

One could even look at it as particularly dangerous to level such charges. We know that the Bible says that when three or more are gathered in Christ's name, the holy spirit is with them. In another account, in Mark 3:20-30 the pharisees were attributing Jesus' miracles to Satan. Jesus goes on to say that those blaspheming against him will be forgiven. Those blaspheming against the holy spirit will not. One could take this to mean that attributing the acts of the holy spirit to Satan is an unforgivable sin. Is it possible, that by labeling people who are gathered in Christ's name where we know the holy spirit is present, we might be committing an unforgivable sin?

Food for thought.

21

"We aren't prideful, we are just giving credit to God's organization"

by Check_Your_Premises in

jw
friends

i reply, "well if that were true, then why do you have to run down all the other christians?".

jw response: "nobody is attacking them personally.

it is the teachings.

Check_Your_Premises

BD,

Sure.

CYP

21

"We aren't prideful, we are just giving credit to God's organization"

by Check_Your_Premises in

jw
friends

i reply, "well if that were true, then why do you have to run down all the other christians?".

jw response: "nobody is attacking them personally.

it is the teachings.

Check_Your_Premises

OS,

You agree that I am the only one who had this conversation, or you agree with the arguments I typed above?

I am trying to get some good talking points for this conversation, as well as get my own thoughts worked out by simply forcing myself to articulate them.

Any other thoughts, or is this just to darn boring of a subject?

I just am not hitting on all my cylinders lately. Anyone who knows me, knows why.

CYP

21

"We aren't prideful, we are just giving credit to God's organization"

by Check_Your_Premises in

jw
friends

i reply, "well if that were true, then why do you have to run down all the other christians?".

jw response: "nobody is attacking them personally.

it is the teachings.

Check_Your_Premises

An, "ok, am I really the only one who had this conversation" bump

21

"We aren't prideful, we are just giving credit to God's organization"

by Check_Your_Premises in

jw
friends

i reply, "well if that were true, then why do you have to run down all the other christians?".

jw response: "nobody is attacking them personally.

it is the teachings.

Check_Your_Premises

I reply, "Well if that were true, then why do you have to run down all the other Christians?"

Jw response: "Nobody is attacking them personally. It is the teachings. Satan is using them to decieve."

I reply, "I have a hard time believing that Satan is using churches that preach salvation through faith in Christ?"

This is a typical exchange many have had I am sure. How did you respond? What is the best way to respond?

I, personally, see no need to spend alot of time pointing out what everyone else is doing wrong. I don't think any aspect of Christianity requires it. I think we are all supposed to keep working on that beam in our own eye before we go looking for specks in other's.

And in regards to incorrect teachings; all that is needed is to reason on them. No need to label or say they are from Satan. Let the facts stand alone.

And in regards to admonishing others; I think all that is needed is to point out what the scriptures say. Nothing else. In that way you are not the one doing the admonishing, nor should you.

Additionally, to decide that all non-members of your group are from Satan sounds awfully judgemental. We aren't supposed to do that.

Of course, many will see the desire to not judge as having no standards. Not true! The standards a person holds themselves to has nothing to do with what standards they chose to criticize in others. And the fact that you might hold yourself to higher standards in no way makes you superior. We all have fallen short.

Lastly, to call yourself God's organization, and to label other Christians as being from Satan sure does lack humility!

THoughts?

32

Sin pictures in What Does The Bible Really Teach

by Check_Your_Premises in

jw
friends

one of my favorite things to do with any wt publication, is to look for the "sin" pictures.

they are always pretty funny, cartoony, and classic propaganda.

the knowledge book had some but it seemed to be toned down from the standard study book that preceded it (i can't remember the name).

Check_Your_Premises

Did you notice the screaming pope looking catholic guy has the lighting shining up towards his face. Every kid has done this when telling ghost stories.

That way we know he is eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil. Everyone knows that anybody that has light shining up towards their face is definitely up to no good.

I also like the smug smiley clergymen all dressed in red. Then in the associated pictures he is sending troops off to war. Bad man! All non-witnesses are bad! I forget which book had that picture.

32

Sin pictures in What Does The Bible Really Teach

by Check_Your_Premises in

jw
friends

one of my favorite things to do with any wt publication, is to look for the "sin" pictures.

they are always pretty funny, cartoony, and classic propaganda.

the knowledge book had some but it seemed to be toned down from the standard study book that preceded it (i can't remember the name).

Check_Your_Premises

I love the guy with the cigar. I also love the two vatos. Not to pc there wt!

Yes defd. Of course those pictures are appropriate, reasonable, and representative in everyway. It is always legitimate to take the worst possible sample, and pass it off as the norm.

There are absolutely no decent, God-fearing folks outside of the JW. That is because the Bible clearly states that even though we have salvation through Christ's sacrifice, and the help of the Holy Spirit to remake us in Christ's image, we still need to be with the right group of imperfect people to truly have salvation. It sure is tough finding the right group! There are just so many saying THEY are the right group!

There are the Catholics, the Mormons. BUt they don't use God's name.

So there is the House of Yahweh. That one is headed up by a guy who claims he is one of the prophets spoken of in Revelation. Then there is Nation of Yahweh. That one is headed up by a guy who says HE is the MEssiah. He can prove it by using the bible to! He has a very scholarly sounding on cable access called the Universe of YWHW, where they (he cant because he is in prison) go through the Bible showing how it all points to him. The problem is they all are not teaching the Kingdom!

So there are the Bible Students (yep they are still all over!), and also the Christadelphians. They teach that hell is not hot, that the soul is not eternal, that we don't go to heaven but stay on earth, that Jesus was not God but a man. But they take blood transfusions!!!

So then there are the Christian Science guys, all the groups that came from Herbert Armstrong. Now he was the Elijah spoken of in Micah that would come to set things right. His group doesn't accept blood as an "adminstrative matter", and they also don't think Jesus was God. They also don't believe it is right to have birthdays or celebrate Christmas! But they weren't chosen in 1919!

Now the jw, they were chosen in 1919 when they were teaching that Christ returned in 1874, even though Christ said not to go after people who said he was returned. They were also teaching that the due time had approached even though Christ said not to believe folks like that. That is ok though. Jesus didn't mind because he knew His one true chruch would be acting like "false prophets" up so He gave them a "prophecy" thousands of years ago that said the "light would grow brighter" for the "false prophets" so they would have an excuse for why they got so much stuff so incredibly wrong. It certainly wasn't because they weren't guided by the Spirit. Apparantly the spirit wanted them to get that stuff wrong! You know, GOd always made his representatives look like jack-asses so everyone would know that He sent them. It's obvious. WOuldn't you do the same thing!?

And that guy on the stauros with Jesus, he definitely had to join the right group before he was saved. And the Ethiopian eunuch had to answer all sorts of questions and go out in field service before he could get baptized. And the jailer in Acts had to join the right group and go to five meetings a week before he could accept Christ's salvation.

Yep. All right there in the Bible.

And of course, finally, there are no decent people outside the JW.

Now go hijack another thread. We are busy trying to find some comfort in healing laughter about this silly "one true" religion that has left an unknowable wake of misery in it's path.

32

Sin pictures in What Does The Bible Really Teach

by Check_Your_Premises in

jw
friends

one of my favorite things to do with any wt publication, is to look for the "sin" pictures.

they are always pretty funny, cartoony, and classic propaganda.

the knowledge book had some but it seemed to be toned down from the standard study book that preceded it (i can't remember the name).

Check_Your_Premises

Those are great pictures posted so far.

Does anyone have any scans from the new book? I am telling you, they are just hilarious. I think another poster might be right. The guy who is bug-eyed staring at his pile of cash might be the funniest.

I am an accomplished sinner. Nobody I have seen sinning ever looks like those wt depictions.

It seems kind of quaint. Like maybe they are just so darn righteous, that they aren't really sure what sin looks like. So they are just kind of going from the pictures from their imaginations, since they lack any real experiences to draw on? But then I know so many who are actually folks that are seeking refuge from an obviously ruined life. Alot of these folks REALLY know sin. Some make me feel like a goody-two-shoes.

So I guess it is to really play up so as to make it seem much more dramatic then it really is? Most of my really awful sinning was very matter of fact.

At any rate. The first step in my "wt check out the new pubs process" is to immediately scan for "sin" pictures.

87

Why Fundyism is Irrational

by jgnat in

lately i've been putting a lot of thought in to what is rational and what must be relegated to faith alone.

ever since the scientific method was discovered, humanity has attempted to put it to work in so many areas.

after all, discoveries exploded once we were set free from the shackles of tradition.

Check_Your_Premises

Bebu,

That was an absolutely beautiful response.

I have never thought that telling people they are wrong had any place in my relationship with Christ. I think I need to keep working on that rafter in my own eye before I go working on that speck in someone else's. Of course, boldly speak the gospel to others! But then in that case you aren't the one telling them they are wrong now are you. And why would anyone want to listen to me if I did. Who the hell am I? Just another who has fallen short.

Humility does not equal weakness.

Bombast does not equal strong convictions.

(Glad you caught my reference. One of the most personally influential books I have ever read. Lewis is on the short list of names if my wife and I have another son.)

CYP

Check_Your_Premises

Posts by Check_Your_Premises