Wannabe (as in Wannabe prophet)
Hi there. Whenever someone would like to do an exegestical smackdown of JW dogma, count me in as an interested observer. The fact that you on a few threads write very indepth essays just to prove that JW's are not correct is cool with me.
It's not like its that hard, lets be honest.
For example, some people who aren't caught in a superstitious mindset would probably read the man of lawlessness passage and think literally, "Hey, I wonder if that means a lawless man!"
But I digress. Paul (supposedly) wrote this close to 2000 years ago if you believe that. To date, no man of lawlessness has appeared matching the description. Which leaves that scripture open to interpretation. Your interpretation is no different then JW's. Would you like to know how? Because as your responses bear out, you condemn people with the same ease that the Governing Body does.
So ultimately, your conclusion for whatever exegesis you delve into is that Jesus will destroy people who don't believe in him? Ok. Count me out.
I am used to having people think I am dead. JW's, many fundamentalist Christian religions, Islam, etc, all have me as dead because I don't worship their god.
So get in line Wannabe. Maybe you condemners can make some small talk and figure out your next strategy to scare the weak minded with a 2000+ year old collection of scrolls into following your god.
Your desire to expose the GB as false is commendable. The fact that you would replace their dogma with a competing dogma designed to frighten, scare and condemn just like Jehovah's Witnesses do makes you no better then Jehovah's Witnesses in my opinion, and waters down whatever value your exegesis might have.
