bluecanary

Joined

• started 59 topics
• posted 1,573 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by bluecanary

• 
  117

  Imperfection is irrelevant. Who has the right to rule?

  by bluecanary in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we started this discussion on another thread, but i didn't want to derail the topic at hand.

  here's where we stand so far:.

  reniaa:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  Isaac puts wrong words in my mouth. I do not give him the right to rule what my words mean. I keep the right for myself.

  Spike, play nice. No one is trying to rule anyone here. If someone misunderstood what you said, then clarify.
• 
  117

  Imperfection is irrelevant. Who has the right to rule?

  by bluecanary in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we started this discussion on another thread, but i didn't want to derail the topic at hand.

  here's where we stand so far:.

  reniaa:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  Fair enough, Spike. You do not believe that the GB must get everything correct; you will follow them regardless. I respect anyone's right to make that choice. Do you understand why other people would not make that choice?

  What criteria do you use to know whether a group understands the Bible correctly?

  This seems like a catch-22. If I read the Bible and understand it to teach that [there is no trinity], [the gospel must be preached] and/or [strict headship must be followed], and I find a religion that teaches that, how am I any different than a person who reads the Bible and understands it to teach that [God is a triune of three persons], [all persons who accept Jesus are acceptable to him] and/or [it's important to celebrate the memorial more regularly than once a year] and chooses a religion that practices these teachings? In either case, I am choosing a religion based on my own understanding of the Bible rather than on evidence that God is backing one particular religion.

  Ask yourself why sincere people come to completely opposite conclusions upon reading the same set of scriptures. I think "sincere" is a fair description because many people have held what you consider to be false beliefs before learning and accepting witness teachings. The fact that they hadn't heard witness teachings before does not negate the sincerity of their earlier beliefs that they knew and cared about the truth of God. And if a person learns witness beliefs and disagrees with them, this does not negate their sincerity.

  In the past, God didn't rely only upon written word that could be taken to have multiple meanings. He made clear what he supported through the use of miraculous signs. You will no doubt point to scriptures showing that at some point, those signs would cease. My question is why? Why would God abandon a practice that worked so well? Yes, many people still rejected these signs, but at least they were rejecting hard evidence rather than vague interpretations. This clearly demonstrated their opposition to God. Does that not seem unfair of God? To offer people hard evidence in the past, but now when people reject his word because they had no more reason to believe it than other mythical claims and yet they receive the same harsh judgement?
• 
  117

  Imperfection is irrelevant. Who has the right to rule?

  by bluecanary in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we started this discussion on another thread, but i didn't want to derail the topic at hand.

  here's where we stand so far:.

  reniaa:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  I know what you meant, palm, and it is a good question. I've been curious to how reniaa feels about that as well. I know Spike has said before that if he sees the GB in error, he chooses to follow what he sees in the Bible.

  EDIT: Not the GB, per se. I think he was talking about the elders.
• 
  117

  Imperfection is irrelevant. Who has the right to rule?

  by bluecanary in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we started this discussion on another thread, but i didn't want to derail the topic at hand.

  here's where we stand so far:.

  reniaa:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  Sorry, didn't mean to make it sound like palmtree's question isn't relevant. Totally is.
• 
  117

  Imperfection is irrelevant. Who has the right to rule?

  by bluecanary in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we started this discussion on another thread, but i didn't want to derail the topic at hand.

  here's where we stand so far:.

  reniaa:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  I don't want to see this thread become a debate about the trinity. Let's agree that some people believe the Bible absolutely denies the trinity and this is an important point for them in choosing a religion, while others believe the Bible shows the opposite. I believe the relevant question, then, how many doctrines must a religion get right in order to prove that they have God's backing? How many are they allowed to get wrong?
• 
  13

  Do Not Eat Hershey!

  by Yizuman in

  1. social
  2. humour

  boys... men... males... guys.... .

  we need to all avoid those hershey candy bars!.

  it's a woman's product!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  Let me break the math down for you guys. If I have one Hershey bar and you have one Hershey bar and I'm PMSing, you better give me your goddamn Hershey bar.

  /prefers Reese's cups
• 
  117

  Imperfection is irrelevant. Who has the right to rule?

  by bluecanary in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we started this discussion on another thread, but i didn't want to derail the topic at hand.

  here's where we stand so far:.

  reniaa:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  Spike, I'm trying to keep this thread on an intellectual level. I appreciate your thoughts and opinions here, but please do not try to bait the other posters. No one has made any assertions of leadership.

  reniaa, thank you for your response. I agree that a system of voting in GB members would not result in the members being any more perfect. Have you ever seen the movie Remember the Titans? In a stirring speech, one of the football players says, "Now, I ain't saying that I'm perfect, 'cause I'm not. And I ain't gonna never be. None of us are. But we have won every single game we have played 'til now. So this team is perfect."

  This thought could be applied to the writers of the Bible. Individually, all were imperfect. But with the application of God's spirit, they produced perfection. Would you agree with that?

  If someone claims to be acting in accord with God's spirit, is it unreasonable, then, to hold their actions, as a group, to a higher standard?

  The point of this religion is not simply whether they are better than the other religions out there. The point is whether or not they do, in fact, have God's backing. If they do not, there is no meaning to what they do. You are, of course, welcome to still do it. But if there is no meaning in it, most people would not choose to live such an unrewarding lifestyle. Therefore it is of the utmost importance to this religion to convince people that it does have God's backing.

  The onus is not upon the people to say, "Well, it looks like they maybe got something right, so I guess I'll believe everything they say." The onus is on the GB to show through everything they do and say as a group that God is working through them. Is God incapable of overcoming human imperfection to get correct information disseminated?

  I believe any one of us can say "IF God chose to work through me, he would make his work perfect despite my imperfection."

  Looking at the context of Romans 12:6-8, I do not see that this indicates an organized body of leaders that must be obeyed. There are many different ways in which a Christian may be a leader, without being a general rule-maker.
• 
  13

  Do Not Eat Hershey!

  by Yizuman in

  1. social
  2. humour

  boys... men... males... guys.... .

  we need to all avoid those hershey candy bars!.

  it's a woman's product!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  Nothing more intimidating than a woman going through the checkout line with some chocolate and a box of tampons.
• 
  55

  Selection of the JWs in 1918/1919 - how might a JW attempt to show from the Bible

  by insearchoftruth in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i had asked my wife, who is in the study phase with a jw sister about the selection of the jws by jc in 1918/1919 time frame and she had actually never heard of that.. the husband of this woman she is studying with has been chomping at the bit to talk to me...well my wife said she will ask him to come show me, using only the bible, how this selection was made...of course she did not clear this request with the dubman before telling me she would do this.. i am guessing he will be there when i get home from work tomorrow, she is also torturing our son with a bs now (her son from a previous marriage).. what sort of reach do you think he will try to make to show this...i am guessing he will try to show 1914 from the daniel/revelation stuff, if he does this i am going to ask him to show 607bce from a non jw source....since i believe it is 586/587 bce as a starting date......i hope to keep him on the 1918/1919 topic, and have some examples of their beliefs from that era to talk about as well.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  insearchoftruth, you have a pm.
• 
  85

  I'm reading the Bible cover to cover...

  by homeschool in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  ....what the heck have i gotten myself into .

  as a sidenote, in genesis 21....abraham threw isaac a party on the day he was weaned.

  check out the history on that and find out what other religions believe about that (i checked out the jewish & baptist websites).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bluecanary

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0r7syc1BSg