note what the reasoning book said about the rapture in 1984:.
rapture.
definition: the belief that faithful christians will be bodily caught up from the earth, suddenly taken out of the world, to be united with the lord in the air.
But the anointed need to be on earth during the GT so that it is cut short and the big A comes...if the anointed go to heaven during the GT then what about the scripture that says on the account of the chosen ones the big A starts?
They are just making this stuff up...
at what point do you believe the soul is made / inserted?
in which of the gametes is the soul or the information for the soul stored, sperm or ovum.
is it inserted at fertilisation, some other point during embryogenesis or is it during fetal development?
Or there is no soul and we are what we are...physical beings...and when we die that is it...
i know some of you have referenced excellent books but i am not sure where to find them.
i am looking for some very good books to give me the other side of not believing the bible.
i am not sure where i stand at this point and would like to be informed.
Expressing their disbelief and doubts Lars? I think they go well beyond that, they actually prove referring to examples in nature and science to back up their belief...these men use sound logic and reasoning to prove theor points...you may want to try and emulate that as did Christ did 2,000 years ago...
from the secret elders' book which states that the list "of course" is "not comprehensive".
nevertheless here are the acts that they deem worthy of specifying as being possible grounds for chucking people out:.
murdermanslaughter such as killing someone while breaking traffic lawsattempting suicidesexual intercourse with someone other than your spouseanal sex with someone other than your spouseoral sex with someone other than your spousesexual stimulation of the genitals of someone other than your spousedelay in reporting a rape?
That list is surely very incomplete? What about gambling? You can be disfellowshipped for that and I never saw it on the list...
Gluttony, Slander etc are others...
1. who do you listen to?
jehovah or his organization?.
2. if you listen to jehovah, how does he speak to you?.
How about this question...
Is it possible for a true prophet to be directed by God’s Spirit and yet is not inspired by God’s Spirit?
To say there is a difference in being "Inspired" and being "directed" by Holy Spirit will not stand in any reasonable discussion...
1. who do you listen to?
jehovah or his organization?.
2. if you listen to jehovah, how does he speak to you?.
A quote from Don Cameron's excellent Captives to a Concept book:
A Spirit-Directed, Uninspired True Prophet?
Here is another example of how faulty reasoning eventually catches up with those who try to force the Bible to uphold
their illusion…
The Governing Body does not deny that the organization claims to be, or acts as God’s prophet.109 What they do
deny is that they are inspired.110 Somewhere along the way someone came up with the idea that it’s all right to put God’s name on their teachings and prophecies as long as they don’t claim to be inspired. But this causes a problem that they apparently haven’t noticed yet. According to the
Bible there are only two kinds of prophets:
• True Prophets
• False Prophets
True prophets are inspired by God. False prophets are
not…
• Inspired true prophets
• Uninspired false prophets
But the Watchtower’s religious leaders have created a third kind of prophet that is a mixture or combination of both a true prophet and a false prophet…
Added to this is the fact they also claim to be “God’s spirit-directed organization.” Therefore, when you add up all the things they do and don’t claim to be, they end up a kind prophet that has never before existed. They now have an illusionary Spirit-directed, uninspired true prophet to go along with their illusionary God’s organization.
1. who do you listen to?
jehovah or his organization?.
2. if you listen to jehovah, how does he speak to you?.
So for instance the society taught prior to 1962 that if you took an organ tranplant you were in fact a cannibal and you asorbed the traits of the person who you got the organ from, and you were to be disfellowshipped...
Was that from the GB? Yes...are they directed/inspired by Holy Spirit? Yes...so Holy Spirit got that one wrong then as after 1962 they scrapped that idea.
The only way Holy Spirit is not wrong is if the Holy Sprit did NOT direct/inspire the GB to teach that teaching and therein lies the whole issue because that means you cannot trust the GB if what they produce may not be as a result of direction/inspiration from the Holy Spirit.
1. who do you listen to?
jehovah or his organization?.
2. if you listen to jehovah, how does he speak to you?.
What utter nonsense...there is NO difference between inspired or directed by Holy Spirit...either the HS is behind the GB's ideas and thoughts or it's not...
The bible writers were "Inspired" to write their books
The GB are directed to give us teachings...
THAT IS THE SAME!
1. who do you listen to?
jehovah or his organization?.
2. if you listen to jehovah, how does he speak to you?.
Q7) Does the Holy Spirit teach wrong teachings?
Q8) Is the GB directed by Holy Spirit?
Q9) If the GB has taught wrong teachings then either the Holy Spirit teaches wrong teachings or the GB is not directed by Holy Spirit, which is it?
Q10) If the GB in the past have taught wrong teachings then how can I trust their advice now and on into the future?
a trusted source informs me that the "new light" about the faithful slave is to make its first printed appearance in the july 15th watchtower, which should be available for download online three weeks from now, on around april 15th.. i'm led to believe that the references to the new understanding are made in such a manner as to suggest the "new light" isn't that new at all, which suggests to me that little or no effort is being made to explain the doctrinal connotations.
my source and i are hoping to get a key paragraph posted at the earliest opportunity.
watch this space!.
I think this is fairly significant in the GB eyes! They need to start to distance themselves from Russell and now they can claim that he was not part of the F&DS...
So all his wacky teachings could change without affecting the appointment of the F&DS...so let's throw 1914 out the window? No problem!
Of course, Rutherford was just as wacky and he was not dead in 1918/19 so....
