Trevor Scott

Joined

• started 16 topics
• posted 371 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Trevor Scott

• 
  236

  I need some good sriptures & reasoning to refute Jesus = Michael Archangel

  by androb31 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have a lot of good stuff at home on the subject but i'm at work and could use some help for a friend who was just conversing w/ a jw..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  Leolaia, very true.

  Other verses show that Jesus is accompanied by angels at his return (Mt 16:27, Mt 24:31, 2 Th 1:7) so not surprising that 1 Th 4:16 would mention the presence of an archangel.

  Peace.
• 
  236

  I need some good sriptures & reasoning to refute Jesus = Michael Archangel

  by androb31 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have a lot of good stuff at home on the subject but i'm at work and could use some help for a friend who was just conversing w/ a jw..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  Sacolton, so true.

  In case any doubt, the '1914 generation' doctrine is a practical example. Back in the day I would debate the legitimacy of this doctrine with JWs who would insist on its correctness. No amount of logic or scripture evidence could convince them the doctrine was false. It was correct in the face of logic, in the face of scripture. It was correct simply because the Watchtower Society said it was correct. And when the WTS said it was false, well it was false. Period. Just like that.

  Always interesting to me is how the fact that they argued endlessly in favor of the 1914 generation, told people at the doors that it was the truth and even "the Creator's promise", is of no consequence to them.

  Where is the guilt for preaching false doctrine? For literally being one of the false teachers the Bible predicted for latter days?

  Where is the fear of God for telling countless people that He "promised" something that he did not promise?
• 
  236

  I need some good sriptures & reasoning to refute Jesus = Michael Archangel

  by androb31 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have a lot of good stuff at home on the subject but i'm at work and could use some help for a friend who was just conversing w/ a jw..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  : You used a version that isn't true to the original question so it loses a lot just for that.

  Lol. Coming from someone who recommends the NWT, that really is funny.

  Are you aware that your cult leaders quote from the CEV regularly?

  You have a problem with the NIV as well? I quoted it verbatim in my last post.

  Verse 9 does not refute my position. How ridiculous. This is a blatant red herring. "Look elsewhere everybody!"

  As your cult leaders and everyone with half a brain accept, verse 5 and 13 are RHETORICAL questions. In other words, they are STATEMENTS worded in the form of a question.

  That being the case, according to verses 5 and 13, God never said 'X' to *ANY* angel, but of course we know He *DID* say 'X' to Jesus. Ergo, Jesus cannot be an angel.

  If you accept scripture, then Jesus CANNOT be an angel. Period. There is nothing to debate. Of course, you are a Jehovah's Witness and therefore you do not believe the Bible; you believe the Watchtower Society. So I'm sure you're still game...

  Trevor.
• 
  236

  I need some good sriptures & reasoning to refute Jesus = Michael Archangel

  by androb31 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have a lot of good stuff at home on the subject but i'm at work and could use some help for a friend who was just conversing w/ a jw..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  PSacramento: Yes, absolutely true. The entire first chapter is devoted to debunking the idea that Jesus is an angel. In that context, the questions in verses 5 and 13 are asked. These questions only make sense as rhetorical questions, which is why some translations render the verses as statements. (As I mentioned to Reniaa, not even the WTS would say that the questions in vs 5 and 13 are not rhetorical.)

  Therefore, it is logically impossible for Jesus to be an angel.

  All the best,

  Trevor.
• 
  236

  I need some good sriptures & reasoning to refute Jesus = Michael Archangel

  by androb31 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have a lot of good stuff at home on the subject but i'm at work and could use some help for a friend who was just conversing w/ a jw..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  : I am "not" one of Jehovah's Witnesses as in a part of the W.T.S.

  Uh-huh. Right. Just some random dude who devotes countless hours of his life to arguing in favor of WT doctrine and policy with former members.

  If it walks like a dub, and it talks like a dub, .......
• 
  236

  I need some good sriptures & reasoning to refute Jesus = Michael Archangel

  by androb31 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have a lot of good stuff at home on the subject but i'm at work and could use some help for a friend who was just conversing w/ a jw..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  Reniaa, you forgot point 6, which is that 'your cult leaders tell you so.' It's really the only point that matters. You will believe that Jesus is Michael until the WTS says that he is not, at which point you will immediately abandon your current belief and start defending the notion that Jesus is NOT Michael. This is why your religion is a cult.

  I have no desire to debate you. You have showed in the past that you care nothing about truth, only about defending your cult masters in the face of their lies and generally trying to ruin decent peoples' days. I'm sorry but I just don't have the time for running around in circles with someone who simply wants to run around in circles because, presumably, she has nothing else going on in her life.

  However I will say lol @ you calling the CEV an "interestingly weird translation". That's you "poisoning the well". (Google it.) Again you show that you care nothing about truth, only defending and promoting your pathetic little cult.

  The CEV renders the verse as a statement while other translations (even your "translation", the nwt) render it as a rhetorical question (again, google it). It's patently obvious from the context that the verses are asking rhetorical questions and not even your cult masters would say otherwise. Read the verses in context (from the NIV):

  1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 3 The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4 So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.
  5 For to which of the angels did God ever say,
  "You are my Son;
  today I have become your Father"? Or again,
  "I will be his Father,
  and he will be my Son"? 6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,
  "Let all God's angels worship him." 7 In speaking of the angels he says,
  "He makes his angels winds,
  his servants flames of fire." 8 But about the Son he says,
  "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
  and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.
  9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
  therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
  by anointing you with the oil of joy." 10 He also says,
  "In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
  and the heavens are the work of your hands.
  11 They will perish, but you remain;
  they will all wear out like a garment.
  12 You will roll them up like a robe;
  like a garment they will be changed.
  But you remain the same,
  and your years will never end." 13 To which of the angels did God ever say,
  "Sit at my right hand
  until I make your enemies
  a footstool for your feet"? 14 Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?
• 
  236

  I need some good sriptures & reasoning to refute Jesus = Michael Archangel

  by androb31 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have a lot of good stuff at home on the subject but i'm at work and could use some help for a friend who was just conversing w/ a jw..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  : However when making reference to anything written in the bible, an "uninspired" testament or "writing" should never be brought in to give weight to a matter in question.

  Why is that? You clearly don't believe the bible otherwise this debate would be over. Thank you for reminding me why I no longer debate Jehovah's Witnesses such as yourself online.

  Peace.
• 
  236

  I need some good sriptures & reasoning to refute Jesus = Michael Archangel

  by androb31 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have a lot of good stuff at home on the subject but i'm at work and could use some help for a friend who was just conversing w/ a jw..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  Wow! This is still going on? According to scripture Jesus CANNOT be Michael, Gabriel, or any other angel.

  Read Hebrews 1:5 and 1:13:

  Hebrews 1:5 - God has never said to any of the angels, "You are my Son, because today I have become your Father!" Neither has God said to any of them, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son!"

  Hebrews 1:13 - God never said to any of the angels, "Sit at my right side until I make your enemies into a footstool for you!"

  According to these verses, God *NEVER* said these things to *ANY* angel. According to other verses, God *DID* say these things to Jesus. (Ps 2:7; Heb 5:5; Ps 110:1; Mt 22:42-44). Logic forces the conclusion that Jesus CANNOT be an angel.

  Numerous other verses show the unlikelihood of Jesus being an angel (as has been pointed out by others), but these two verses in Hebrews PROVE it conclusively.

  Seriously, why is this debate still going on? According to scripture Jesus cannot be an angel. Period. The irony is that these verses in Hebrews were written to settle this very debate. So why are we still debating? Have we disregarded scripture in this matter? Is this just debate for the sake of debate?
• 
  16

  For those that say the Witnesses are NOT a HCG - High Control Group

  by besty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  let's start a quick list for reference.. here's a gem from the 2008 keep yourself in god's love book:.

  "....should the newlyweds identify to all the giver of each gift?

  christians from macedonia.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  No doubt the resident troll does not consider regulating what goes on in the bedroom of married persons to be "high control", but it strikes me as such...

  "Unnatural practices in connection with sex in marriage, such as oral and anal copulation, have caused some of God's people to become impure in his eyes. But The Watchtower kept above this morass of filth by alerting married couples to God's thinking on the matter." (WT 76 Feb 15 p.122-3)

  Way to keep above the morass of filth, Watchtower. Yay, cults!
• 
  42

  Messages for the bethal watchers...

  by highdose in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  since we have had it recently proved that we are indeed being watched and monitored by the suits at bethal, i thought it would be fun to start a thread just for sending messages to these people... we can be sure they will be read;).

  i'll start... " ha!

  i've escaped well and truly and theres no way anyone of you will ever find me again!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Trevor Scott

  Hi Mom. Hi Dad.