leavingwt: No you are wrong. I a very open to other ideas actually. Its just boneheads on this forum want to argue every possible aspect of every possible meaning of every possible word. As opposed to blindly accepting the WT drivel on what the words mean (always tailored in each case to support WT doctrine)? If you get that I am arguing these points on my own then you are much more blind than I - and apparently it is I who cannot help you. Go sell crazy somewhere else -
isaacaustin
JoinedPosts by isaacaustin
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.
in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.
however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.
-
-
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.
in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.
however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.
-
-
isaacaustin
When I think of the WT I can see no more of a direct fulfillment of Jesus words at matt 15:8 and 9
This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with [their] lips; but their heart is far from me.
But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.
in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.
however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.
-
-
isaacaustin
This is where the WT fails big-time (one of the many areas)
Hbr 8:10 For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: Hbr 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. -
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.
in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.
however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.
-
-
isaacaustin
isaacaustin: The law of love is a law. Sure, it is not a written list of rules as the WT purports. It even has subparts No, it is an overriding principle... - Love God, Love your neighbor, Love your enemy, etc etc. covered by the principle of love...of course God comes first Jesus did not fulfill LAW, he fulfilled THE LAW - the MOSAIC LAW. Exactly. Why are we even having this debate, since I can't see where we are in great conflict. Do you believe in law??? In law? Such as the law of the land? Yes. Such as a list of written rules a Christian is to follow? No. Please re-read what I posted above in Hebrews. This law of love is written in our hearts and is an overriding principle in everything. Not a list of things that are banned and things that are required. The WT has more rules to it than the Mosaic Law had! If yes, then we are done. I agree. Your assertions have no basis except in a WT.
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.
in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.
however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.
-
-
isaacaustin
You guys like to dance with words a bunch.
Hmm, let me see. The Wt denoucing others is speaking the truth (regardless of the truth or lack thereof of the comments made)....while anyone speaking against the WT (regardless of how true) is apostasy. That would be called a double standard as well as dancing with words.
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.
in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.
however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.
-
-
isaacaustin
isaacaustin: Well through your own words you have highlighted the issue. If Franz talks against the WTBTS you categorize it as "his experience". He makes comments about regret for helping people become JWs due to the nature of JW's acting as mediator for Christ. He makes comments about how they interpret scripture incorrectly, how there organizational structure is more important to the WTBTS than actual truth.....from a JW perspective, that is attacking the WT. You guys like to dance with words a bunch. He talks of his experience and backs it up. Yes, it is not to the benefit of the WT, so call it against if you like. He does it without bitterness or assertion. The WT is far guiltier of talking against other religions...while they are guilty of the same exact things they try to lambast others for it (hmm I seem to remember some sort of sex abuse scandal 5/07 where 12.5 million was paid out).
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.
in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.
however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.
-
-
isaacaustin
Johnnyc...please read...
Hbr 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. Hbr 8:7 For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. Hbr 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Hbr 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. Hbr 8:10 For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: Hbr 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. Hbr 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away. see verse 11.
No, Jesus never said the law was bad...he said he would fulfil it...and leave us under the law of love. Peter described it as something none of them could bare. Paul described it as something Jesus nailed to the cross (stake if you prefer).
We are not under these stacks of laws that the WT has imposed on its members. Jesus did not free us from the law of Moses to have us go under the Law of the WT.
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.
in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.
however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.
-
-
isaacaustin
Post 69 of 69
since 08-Mar-08Mary: His extra activities are posted everywhere - including Youtube - check it out, easy to search, and there are many different videos. And please point to one that is JWbashing, as opposed to calmly and factually relating his experiences.
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.
in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.
however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.
-
-
isaacaustin
Actually Ray defends the intentions of the WT Johnnyc.
In his book (ISOCF) he talks of a time when he was invited onto a radio show to speak of his experiences in the WT and the host was very sarcastic, degrading the WT and calling it a cult. Ray mentioned how he ended up spending the hour or so defending the WT.
Ray's books have no bitterness and he backs up his statements with documention. You will also find that his behind the scene explanations fit the reality of the history of the org (as far as changes in policy) like a glove.
-
22
Ray Franz emailed me today
by Mickey mouse insorry to name drop.
.
here's a question: if i wrote a letter to any of the current governing body members, what chance would i have of receiving a personal reply?
-
-
isaacaustin
Ray can be contacted at [email protected]
He is slow in answering to to age and health
He seems very hospitable...he invited me for a visit if I ever travel southward.