I'm glad to say I never had one.
peacedog
JoinedPosts by peacedog
-
4
Your Judicial Committee
by jookbeard inmine commenced on a saturday afternoon and lasted a full 2 saturdays which concluded with my d/fing on that final day one dark,damp november in 1993. the committee was made up of 4 , chairman;bro geoff woodfield with;stan rogers,(idiot)rensford ming and dave churchill(even bigger idiot) the appeal committee consisted of chairmen ; bro ron bicknell, with; peter davey and alan neal, in which the decision to d/f was reversed.. any one remember the elders on their j/c's ?
and what they were like?.
.
-
-
-
15
Who has greater love for us, Jesus or Jehovah?
by peacedog inthe oct 2009 kool-aid edition makes this statement:.
but jesus gave his life as an expression of love.
"no one has love greater than this," said jesus, "that someone should surrender his soul in behalf of his friends.
-
-
peacedog
So how does the JW resolve John 15:13 which implies that "no one" has greater love than Jesus?
-
15
Who has greater love for us, Jesus or Jehovah?
by peacedog inthe oct 2009 kool-aid edition makes this statement:.
but jesus gave his life as an expression of love.
"no one has love greater than this," said jesus, "that someone should surrender his soul in behalf of his friends.
-
-
peacedog
Hi PSac: I think from the dub perspective you can.
Approaching this from a Christian perspective, there's not much of a question. Jesus is God, so of course he has the greatest love for us. He is the "God of Love" and he fulfilled John 15:13 himself. Makes quite a bit more sense.
But from the dub perspective... you have two distinct spirit-persons, one named Jesus and one named "Jehovah". One is God and one is not. The one who is NOT God applied John 15:13 to himself. This appears to me to create a bit of a conundrum for JWs. Will they admit that Jesus has greater love for us than their God "Jehovah"? Or will they disregard John 15:13 in favor of their doctrinal preference?
-
15
Who has greater love for us, Jesus or Jehovah?
by peacedog inthe oct 2009 kool-aid edition makes this statement:.
but jesus gave his life as an expression of love.
"no one has love greater than this," said jesus, "that someone should surrender his soul in behalf of his friends.
-
-
peacedog
Alright, it's true that I could have included Superman and Satan in the list. In fact I initially had Santa Claus on the list but removed him because I figured he'd win hands down.
Seriously though, from a dub perspective, who has the greater love for us? Given John 15:13, it seems that no one has greater love for us than Jesus. But would the dubs acknowledge this? Wouldn't admitting this be some kind of slight against "Jehovah"? Wouldn't such an admission threaten "Jehovah's" position as the "God of love"?
-
15
Who has greater love for us, Jesus or Jehovah?
by peacedog inthe oct 2009 kool-aid edition makes this statement:.
but jesus gave his life as an expression of love.
"no one has love greater than this," said jesus, "that someone should surrender his soul in behalf of his friends.
-
-
peacedog
The Oct 2009 kool-aid edition makes this statement:
But Jesus gave his life as an expression of love. "No one has love greater than this," said Jesus, "that someone should surrender his soul in behalf of his friends." —John 15:13. (p.14)
And yet the WT$ is constantly harping on how "loving" it was for their "Jehovah" to send his innocent son to die.
It got me wondering, who loves us more? Jesus? Or "Jehovah"?
And how would the dubs answer? (I presume with a resounding "Jehovah!")
But wasn't it MORE loving for the innocent Jesus to WILLINGLY DIE FOR US while "Jehovah" sat back and watched?
-
54
Would the WT$ outright lie?
by peacedog inin another thread the question of whether or not the wt$ would "outright lie" was raised.. i happen to believe that they would in a heartbeat, although i agree that their preference is for sneaky misleading statements as opposed to outright lies.
regardless, here's a short list of some of what i consider incontrovertible evidence that yes, the wt$ would outright lie.. .
consider the following statements printed in the wt magazine:.
-
-
peacedog
"Jehovah caused to be preached"
Lol, no doubt.
Since then the WT$ has said that even though they have made false predictions in the past, never did they "presume to originate predictions 'in the name of Jehovah'". Guess that adds up to another lie.
peace
-
-
-
peacedog
I think a lot of us are wondering about V. Is there anything that can be shared publicly?
creativhoney: check www.watchtowercomments.com
-
7
Have there been any new pdf downloads of WTs
by Gordy inhave there been any downloads of recent watchtowers lately..
-
-
peacedog
cool. Thanks.
-
54
Would the WT$ outright lie?
by peacedog inin another thread the question of whether or not the wt$ would "outright lie" was raised.. i happen to believe that they would in a heartbeat, although i agree that their preference is for sneaky misleading statements as opposed to outright lies.
regardless, here's a short list of some of what i consider incontrovertible evidence that yes, the wt$ would outright lie.. .
consider the following statements printed in the wt magazine:.
-
-
peacedog
blondie and ninja: Thanks for more examples.
Joshnaz: Good point. The WT$ has defined a lie as "saying something false to a person who is entitled to know the truth". Tricky. I guess they view their millions of members and millions more who might read their magazines as not being entitled to know the truth.
-
54
Would the WT$ outright lie?
by peacedog inin another thread the question of whether or not the wt$ would "outright lie" was raised.. i happen to believe that they would in a heartbeat, although i agree that their preference is for sneaky misleading statements as opposed to outright lies.
regardless, here's a short list of some of what i consider incontrovertible evidence that yes, the wt$ would outright lie.. .
consider the following statements printed in the wt magazine:.
-
-
peacedog
Homer: Agreed that many (most) JWs don't know the past bullshit of the org. It's for that reason the WTS can get away with printing such blatant lies.
I'm not sure if I agree that the writers aren't familiar with the organization's history though. I think they'd need to be familiar with it.
And lest we forget, the articles are "checked carefully by members of the governing body before they are published."
*** w59 10/1 p. 607 Questions From Readers ***
The literature published by the Watch Tower Society is published in the name of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. Regardless of who may write certain articles, they are checked carefully by members of the governing body before they are published; so they are properly viewed as coming from the Society.