Posts by isaacaustin

33

Hi all

by mouthy in

jw
friends

just got back from a wonderful reunion with all the exjws ...pennsylvania.

so many there, it is really like a family love in.

koolaid gave an excellent exposure of the wt.

isaacaustin

generally you can find mp3s of the convention on www.jwinfoline.com and www.towertotruth.net

407

Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?

by reniaa in

i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.

there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.

isaacaustin

Otwo

Those are great points anyone should consider. An active JW should be especially interested in these. Hey if their examination leads them to beleive the WT is correct then there beleifs will be reaffirmed and so much strong. Truth has nothing to fear.

407

Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?

by reniaa in

i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.

there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.

isaacaustin

LOL very good point DoubtingBro. I had forgotten that the WT insists that Romans 14 is talking specifically and only of the Jewish feasts. So Reniaa sounds like she is in direct disagreement with the WT in stating he was speaking of all celebrations. However, regardless of whether Paul is talking of Jewish customs or all customs the bottom line is that Paul shows choice. Observance or nonobservance is no issue and one should not be judged on either.

407

Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?

by reniaa in

i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.

there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.

isaacaustin

hmmm isaac I'm not sure I buy the 'we can do something without it being wrong as long as our intent is good' argument

That is the point of the commentaries you used to try to prove your point.

if that was the case Christmas wouldn't be becoming more a secular festival losing it's christian tag and people are coming to accept that, but also the principle that if you get so involved with festivals and marking the years that you get mired in everyday things to start putting God in a minor place in your life is also there from my thoughts on the scripture.

This is an unrelated point to the issue- Is the any sort of Scriptural objection? No there is not. The point that some may take away the Christian tag does not have a bearing here. Others observe with the intent of bringing praise to the Lord and preserving its Christan tag.

But do they lack superstition as well? why do all the rituals need observing, with certain feast days?

That is the point of Galatians- the observance of the day is a non-issue so long as the superstition is not the driving force.

no need to answer they were rhetorical questions. lol lets just agree to disagree you may have found some common ground from all the examples but my intent was only to show that many thought it pertained to specific feasts which i think I managed.

Yes, that is possible. But still doesn't show any sort of Scriptural objection. In fact, it agrees with the stance that the day is a nonissue- it is the outlook.

407

Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?

by reniaa in

i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.

there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.

isaacaustin

Reniaa

Even taking these commentaries into account..the point present in all of them is why these were being observed- with a superstitious outlook, or for salvation, under duress of damnation. Showing clearly it is intent that is at issue- not the day itself being wrong.

407

Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?

by reniaa in

i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.

there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.

isaacaustin

You claim that an (unidentified) number of people think this is referring to pagan feasts. Do you have any links or references to back up this claim? I'm not familiar with any texts that indicate this could be a reference to celebrating "pagan feasts". Yes Reniaa Please don't be like the WT here. You made a claim now back it up with sources. You know Reniaa, prior to your posting this I thought you were simply following your WT mind and taking a verse out of context. Now this reply shows how sad shape a JW truly is in. It shows how far, how ridiculous statements you will make simply to uphold WT teachings- regardless if right or wrong. I can not believe you are that stupid to have read these Galatian verses and beleive Paul was talking to the newly converted Gentiles about pagan holidays.

407

Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?

by reniaa in

i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.

there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.

isaacaustin

Reniaa

If this debate closes i would simply like to encourage you to read the Bible in whole without any sort of commentaries or lit- especially WT lit which I beleive you are psting from. You answers and replies wreak of the WT- and sadly show a lack of critical thinking and reading. You have presented multiple verses out of context and when pointed out to you you simply try to say it is a controversial scripture that can mean many things. This is the same verse that you, previous to my showing you what the verse really says, tried to use as a definite proof text that the WT point is correct. Very sad.

The WT is effective in capturing the minds of those who do not critically think. They know what they beleive but not why they beleive what they believe. Thus their beleifs are easily refuted by the WT out of context proof texts that are usually combined with other unrelated texts to make the point appear substantiated.

I have found the ideologies you have spouted here to be WT rubbish with no substance whatsoever. Again, I hope you can break free from this control the WT has over you.

407

Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?

by reniaa in

i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.

there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.

isaacaustin

Hi isaacaustin and mrsjones this is a contraversial scripture as no one can be 100% which days months and years hes refering too, some say its jewish days but others say since galations was pagan lol it was refering to pagan feasts and suchlike. Opinion is mixed on it. So its one all reading must draw there own conclusions from reading in context. Reniaa The context of the previous verses take any controversy away from this. Who was Paul talking to? The people who were trying to be saved by works of the Law. But even if we said he was talking to the Gentiles (which he wasn't) he is not outlawing the days. He is simply warning that pinning one's salvation on them won't work. Makes no sense to say he was talking to the Gentiles- actually ends up sounding stupid. The Gnetiles were not trying to corrupt the grace of God with works of the Law.

407

Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?

by reniaa in

i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.

there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.

isaacaustin

LOL MsJones- great minds think alike...we posted in unison

407

Is it the JW's or the God of the bible you no longer believe?

by reniaa in

i have a question for the ex-jw's on this forum after months of reading the forum..... many say how good it is to be free of the oppressiveness of the jw's that they can now enjoy the freedom to... have sex, celebrate christmas, gamble, embrace politics etc.

there are still biblical scriptures and principles in place that if you still followed the bible would mean you avoid these things and yet these are now embraced as one of the perks of no longer being a jw so in my confusion i ask.... if these are what you want, isn't it more correct to say you no longer follow the bible as apposed to just the jw's?.

isaacaustin

Lets put galatians back into context Reniaa:

beginning in verse 1:

Now I say, [That] the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;
Gal 4:2		But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.
Gal 4:3		Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:
Gal 4:4		But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
Gal 4:5		To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Gal 4:6		And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
Gal 4:7		Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
Gal 4:8	¶	Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.
Gal 4:9		But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
Gal 4:10		Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
Gal 4:11		I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. verses 1-3 clearly show Paul is dicussing man under the law- before Chrsit set us free. 4-7 show that they had accepted Christ, 9-11 show this was only to turn back to the Law..perverting the Gospel by mixing works of the law with grace. Obviously not cautioning on holidays