Narkissos, I always thought it odd as a JW that we placed so much emphasis on the notion of perfection, yet I couldn't recall one scripture that actually used the term in reference to how God created humanity or expected them to be in the paradise. Thanks for the information you posted.
Spike, thank you for your in-depth responses. You said:
Whoever is even-handed and righteous in their understanding and application of love and its prophetic statements, and holy in their motives is Jehovah's representative, whether as an individual, as a family, as a congregation, or as a brotherhood. The Bible sets the criteria in these matters.
Does this include individuals, families or congregations who fit those qualifications outside of the WTS? Does it matter that the GB recognizes no one but themselves as God's representatives?
"Doctrines" is also translated "teachings", which should all be in accord with the spirit of the Holy Scriptures, and fitting a wholistic view of the circumstances to which the teachings are applied.
Do I understand you correctly, that you are saying the true religion should not get any teachings wrong, but all its teachings should be in accord with the Scriptures? I'm not sure what you mean by "wholistic view of the circumstances." Does that mean that teachings can take on different meanings depending on the circumstances to which they are applied? Can you give me an example of what you mean here?
Of course, fundamental to all of this is Christ's directive to love Jehovah whole-souled, and our neighbour (including our enemy) as ourself.
I think this is such an important point; I'm glad you brought it out. Question: When you can take another Scriptural directive and interpret it in different ways, shouldn't you use the interpretation that is most in harmony with those two commands?
For example, you cite the Scripture at Acts 15:28, to abstain from blood. This can be interpreted in several ways including (a) a temporary suggestion to avoid an act that could stumble certain people at that time, (b) a permanent command regarding a dietary restriction and (c) a permanent command to avoid blood even if it is a non-dietary, life-saving treatment. Which of these interpretations is in harmony with the two most important commands to love God, the Creator and lover of life, and love our fellow man who holds his life dear?
if two sets of judicial decisions teach the same correct points, then we choose by our obedient understanding and applications, as our spirit of holiness approaches Jehovah's, in the manner of James 4:8
Does this mean that God will direct you to the correct religion? Does that mean that anyone who chooses the other religion(s) did not, for some reason, have God's blessing in choosing between two religions that taught the same doctrines? If someone is sincere enough to try to choose a religion based on correct understanding of the Bible, why would God not direct them to the correct group? Unless it doesn't matter to him which group they join.
