by TD 23 Replies latest jw friends
Excellent observations, TD! Thanks!
WTWizard asked,
I wonder what basis they have for that drama. If it isn't in the Bible, then where do they come up with it? After all, it is going to affect how people are going to live, and if they don't have the sources they took it from, it could well be something the Filthful and Disgraceful Slavebugger made up totally from scratch.WTW, don't you realize that the FDS is directed by Jehovah's Magic Spirit? If they say it happened, it happened, by gum!
Thank you for your observations, they are greatly appreciated!!
MMO
TD, great analysis... except you're wrong on one point:
a gentleman by the name of Steven Lett, a member of the JW governing body
Stephen Lett is no gentleman. The correct statement would be:
a douchebag by the name of Steven Lett, a member of the JW governing body
There, that looks better. I'd like to kick him in the crotch and then thank him for proving to me that JWs are a manmade cult run by cracker-eating, wine-sipping douchebags.
Have a nice day ,
B the X
Thanks Billy
Stephen Lett is no gentleman.
I'm only a UBM. You would know way more about him than me
I stand corrected!
Great observations TD. Thanks for sharing them. It's nice to get the perspective of someone who has never sipped the Kool-Aid.
Please indulge my dubby ignorance with this question.
What does "c.f." mean?
I'm guessing it's some secular abbreviation that the Watchtower refrains from using for God knows what reason.
(c.f. James 1:27, c.f. Didache, c.f. Ephesians 4:12, etc.)
om
Thanks TD. My condolences!
"Scolios" --Are they implying he was "crooked"? (I happen to have scoliosis)
Great analysis. Thanks for that. This will definitely be useful to me.
Were the 'poztates out in full force? At least they don't have to wear suits in 110 degree heat like the dub parking attendants.
Btw,
On your biblical citation countering the assertion that all 1st century Christians were "evangelizers", I think you meant to reference Eph 4:11, rather than Eph 4:12.
There, that looks better. I'd like to kick him in the crotch and then thank him for proving to me that JWs are a manmade cult run by cracker-eating, wine-sipping douchebags.- Billy X So he did turn out to be a spoiled rich kid? Did you ever meet his wife..Sue?. That poor girl was a Stepford wife grade 9 when I knew her. Hill
"cited from"?
*** it-1 p. 244 Balaam ***As Cook’s Commentary observes on Numbers 24:25: "Returnedtohisownplace . . . Not to his own land, for he remained amongst the Midianites to plot by new means against the people of God, and to perish in his sin. . . . The phrase, which is of frequent recurrence (cf. e.g. Gen. xviii. 33, xxxi. 55; I S.xxvi. 25; 2 S. xix. 39), is idiomatic, meaning merely that Balaam went away whither he would."
As always, my hat is off to you Blondie.
Your "fact checking" is invaluable to this site, IMO.
When I was a lurker your level-headed comments kept me from writing this place off as just a bunch of bitter, foaming-at-the-mouth, exagerating, malcontents.
Thanks.
om
1. He claimed that all dedicated, baptized Jehovah's Witnesses (And he included himself in this claim) have answered the following question in the affirmative:
Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah's Witnesses in association with God's spirit-directed organization?
This claim should have evoked laughter from anyone in the audience who had any critical thinking skills. There is not one verse in all of the New Testament which suggests that Christians were to be baptized into a congregation. Jesus words about baptizing converts in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit were understood to be clear, unambiguous, and without need of clarification. The Apostles understood this as well; as their teachings regarding baptism were in compliance with Jesus' instructions. The apostles did not tack on additional requirements for Christian immersion. To take such liberties would have been viewed as "apostate" teachings, and causing divisions.
There was never any indication in the NT that converts were obligated to verbally acknowledge being baptized into the particular congregation doing the baptizing. Verbally acknowledging being baptized into a particular congregation was never a prerequisite for immersion, and was eventually written about by Paul as preaching a "new gospel". Paul rebuked those who began to demonstrate this trend toward giving allegiance to certain men. For those who began to place their allegiance to Paul above Christ; Paul sarcastically asked them: "Was I crucified for you?" and "were you baptized into the name of Paul?"
For over 1,900 years, true Christians knew what Christian baptism entailed. Christ's instructions were very clear and straightforward. There was never any need for an organization 1,900 years later to "clarify" Jesus' instructions regarding baptism. To feel qualified to overwrite Christ's own words is nothing short of arrogance.
Unfortunately, even the JW Governing Body don't read their Bibles enough. They are too infatuated with the perceived aura of the Writing Department as "God's channel. Unfortunately, there are too few in the organization who are able or willing to demonstrate the most basic of critical thinking skills needed to identify such fallacious rhetoric.
