For Sh***ing One - Do I represent Christ Properly?

by jgnat 55 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  jgnat

  Me: S***ing one: WHERE have I complained about scripture?

  He: Then you have now changed your mind and believe that all scripture is inspired?

  Me: As others have already helpfully pointed out, questioning and complaining are completely different. Find examples, please. Maybe I complained somewheres about some of Paul's statements, but I don't think so.

  Me: S***ing one: WHERE have I belittled Christian doctrine?

  He: Let's try evangelism and in particular deathbed evangelism; the headship principle; the fact that scripture is divinely inspired and is the foundation for our morals and beliefs; the fact that Jesus is THE ONLY WAY to heaven;

  Me: I ascribe to Orthodox Christianity as outlined in the Nicene Creed. Now, THAT I consider Christian doctrine. None of the statements above, some which I agree I have criticized, are part of the Nicene Creed.

  http://www.apologeticsindex.org/o00.html#orthodoxy

  Is criticism the same as belittling? As Christians, we must look at the RESULTS of our behavior. Are they having the desired effect? I say, if the law of LOVE is violated, all the knowledge and worship of scriptures cannot save us from judgement.

  He: You set yourself up as a judge of scripture when you have no apparent qualifications to do so.

  Me: How else can I judge if not by my own mind?

  Me: On the other hand, I do think it is my Christian duty to regularly examine my foundation, to be sure of what is true. To take a good look in the mirror, so to speak.

  He: The mirror is God's word, just as it says in James. You question God's word and thereby set yourself up as your own god.

  Me: I think Little Toe said it best. I say the Word is different than the word. Prove me otherwise.

  He: You have already compromised when you accept the worldview of those who are in opposition to the gospel message.

  He: What you are supposed to examine is your view in light of scripture, not scripture in light of the world's guidelines.

  Me: You mean, "not scripture in light of your own observations". If I did that I would be just as blind as a regular Jehovah's Witness. That's how they get sucked in to abnormal behavior, you know. They MUST do it because the bible says so. Mothers must ignore their natural instincts and turn away from their own children! Children are refused life-saving blood! The perversion of scripture truth slays me.

  He: The gospel message is an offence because it confronts people with their own sin and pride.

  Me: That may be true, but it does not follow that if you are offensive you are representing Christ properly. I believe the Holy Spirit has sent me to give you a message, to prick your conscience, and to learn a new way of presenting the message that brings healing instead of hurt. Your reaction is proof that my message is needed.
• 

  parakeet

  jgnat,
  Don't get yourself worked up over what the Scintillating One says. He's lucid only five percent of the time, if that.
• 

  jgnat

  Where'd he go?

  Hey, parakeet, it's also for the audience. I know Evangelicals would hate to consider that they might be playing in the same sandbox as Jehovah's Witnesses, but if the shoe fits, take another look at your feet!
• 

  Satanus

  Where is christianus fundamentalus rex?

  S
• 

  Shining One

  >Me: I ascribe to Orthodox Christianity as outlined in the Nicene Creed. Now, THAT I consider Christian doctrine. None of the statements above, some which I agree I have criticized, are part of the Nicene Creed.
  
  You would rather use semantics to deny that you are complaining and compromising. You are a compromiser who has no Biblical foundation except your own idea of 'the law of love'. You belittle the very gospel when you compromise on the principles and precepts of valid doctrine. You belittle the saving power of the gospel by denying that a person headed for hell (deathbed) can be brought to salvation by the Lord, using one bold enough to share His word. If you deny that Jesus Christ is the one way to God (and I am not sure that you do) for whatever reason, you are compromising His message to the world. You are in a popularity contest. You tickle the 'itching ears' with your compromise and rob the gospel of it's very power to save.
  
  >Me: I think Little Toe said it best. I say the Word is different than the word. Prove me otherwise.
  More semantics and the 'merry go round' begins again......
  Rex
• 

  Shining One

  >Me: That may be true, but it does not follow that if you are offensive you are representing Christ properly. I believe the Holy Spirit has sent me to give you a message, to prick your conscience, and to learn a new way of presenting the message that brings healing instead of hurt. Your reaction is proof that my message is needed.
  
  You have not given me that message at all. You have given a message to those who are perishing that they can have it 'both ways'. You appplaud and encourage compromise, then when called on it you go off into semantics instead of dealing with the real issue: the eternal souls of those who would find more reasons not to believe because of your own belittling of the word of God.
  Rex
• 

  hallelujah

  Hi Shining One

  The other day I compared the alleged genealogies of Jesus in Mathew, Luke, and Genesis. None of them match up at all. In fact they are absolutely contradictory, as a kindergarten student could well perceive.

  Dan
• 

  hillary_step

  I have a feeling deep in my ragged spleen that one day Shining One & Gnat are going to meet in a hotel room in Las Vegas, fall in love with each others Bibles, and with a sense of abandoned guilt give way to Genesis 4:1.

  Nine months later as they stroll hand in hand along the main boulevard back home in Brigadoon, pushing the perambulator stuffed full of Shining triplets, they will argue about whether the one that seems to alseep all the time is actually the Holy Spirit or God on a Sunday.

  HS

  Edited to add an emoticon, lest Shining one drown me in evangelistic spittle. PS. I knew Syd Barrett, so please go easy on me.
• 

  Shining One

  Jgnat, this is from an exchange we had awhile ago
  >Goody, a challenge.
  You seem to be flippant about serious discussions that involve eternal souls. I recently told you that the idea is not to 'win' debates by semantics but to win souls.
  I asked you this: Q. I wonder why you claim to be Christian when you consistently ignore scripture and context?
  >Your answer: A. I am a follower of Christ. Not a follower of Bible. There's a difference.
  Our only actual knowledge of Christ is from scripture and history. You contradict yourself by belittling the Bible, which is where your knowledge of Christ comes from.
  I asked you this: Q. Are you saying that trying to respect and obey scriptural commands is somehow incorrect for Christians?
  >You answered: A. Trying to defend the bible as infallible as God is infallible is doomed to failure. You are forced to believe that the world is a flat disk supported on pillars, sheol below, and a dotted tent above, Heaven. This is what the Isrealite ancestors believed, and this is what the OT references to Sheol and Heaven are based on.
  Your foundation for belief is then without any intelligent support according to your compromised, liberal opinionated exegesis.
  I then asked: Q. What do you use as the standard to justify ignoring some scripture and embracing others?
  >You answered: A. Two scriptures I use as my touchstone; Love God, love others as myself. And second, if it bears good fruit, we got it right.
  If you do not believe the word of God then how can you know that you are being obedient, but actually believing YOUR OWN IDEA of who God is? How do you define, 'good fruit'? What STANDARD do you have to judge 'good fruit' other than your own biased axioms?
  I then asked: If you don't believe that it teaches the truth of Almighty God, then how can you claim to be a follower of Jesus Christ? Q. The 'inconsistencies' that you claim exist are typically reconciled.
  >You answered: A. Yes, but at what cost? If I took all scripture literally, I should be wearing a headpiece as I speak to you. I am not. Modern apologetics "explain away" this requirement, but by doing so, they lose their integrity. If the bible is infallible, then there should not be anything to "explain away".
  You assert another violation of scripture with disdain: that being "always be ready to give an answer for what you believe" and I believe that Peter also said that "We do not follow cleverly contrived tales". The apostle Peter asserts the reliablility of scripture as does Jesus. JESUS CONSISTENTLY affirms the reliability of scripture.
  I then said: Q. Christians do not have to explain nor account for all alleged 'inconsistencies' to gain the upper hand in apologetics.
  >You responded with: A. True, if they are defending their faith. If, on the other hand, they are trying to defend the bible as infallible, they must certainly explain every inconsistency. Without relying on modern work-arounds. This is because athiests also have available to them full texts of the bible and rightfully so can call us to account.
  Here you are again denying the obligation of the believer and with a falsehood. We, as Christians do not have to have every answer for every question. You also do not understand the difference between 'infallibility' and 'inerrancy'. You put up a 'straw man'. Inerrancy cannot be proven because we have no means to see the original documentation. We can only point out the reliability of texts when compared!
  Infallibility deals with principles and not the inerrant details. By the way, you are in direct violation of the affirmed creeds of the early church on scripture reliability.
  I then asked: Q. 'Twisted doctrine' is the result of interpreting scripture out of context. Perhaps you can explain to us the basis you use to judge another Christian's obedience to scripture and why they should not do so?
  >Your reply: Q. I gave three examples. Four including the headpiece. The JW abstension from blood is another. The JW's insistence that God's heroes weren't such bad guys after all, by explaining away their indescretions. Such as David's murder of Bathsheba's first husband.
  None of the above apply. These are misapplications. Scripture readily points out the faults of it's characters.
  I then asked: Q. Again, if you do not hold scrpture to be factual,
  >A. Scripture is factual now? Scripture to back that up, please.Q. ....on what basis do you claim to be Christian?
  Here is the Jgnat 'merry go round' of semantics in operation.....
  >Your next response:A. I .....am.....a.......follower......of......Christ. I am reasonably certain that Jesus' instruction got to us fairly intact. I am confident in following his example, and take the cross if necessary.
  That is totally inconsistent. You assert that you are 'reasonable certain' yet you readily and consistently deny the very Word that forms the basis for your belief.
  >You then added: Q. * I've seen abusers use the bible to force their victims to "forgive" them and remain in an abusive situation. How can a Christian accomplish this without being a cultist, like you and I came out of? Surely you are not comparing orthodox Christianity with Jw-ism, are you?
  Sarcasm and misrepresentation of my statements.
  >Then you said: A. I was never a JW. The examples of which I am speaking were in an evangelical church. I am saying that ANYBODY can use the bible as an offensive weapon, if they are diabolical enough.
  Agreed on that point.
  Now. here is another example of your compromise:
  >You said: Q. * I've seen evangelicals bully a deathbed conversion in order to "save" the poor soul waiting to die.
  I said: Perhaps you can tell me why Romans 3.23; 6.23; 5.8; 10.9-11, John 3.3;. 3.5;, 3.16, Eph. 2.8-9 do not apply to every individual alive and why a evangelical is wrong to compassionately share scripture with another soul? What part of Matthew 28.18-20 and Acts 1.8 are you too 'good' to observe and obey?
  Then you replied with this:
  >A. I saw it. It was shameful. I know in my heart of hearts it was wrong. Now, I share my faith in all kinds of situations. But I do it when the person is relaxed and in possession of all their faculties. If a person is not in a frame of mind to write a will, why would we coerce a deathbed conversion from them?
  You assume coercion and the gospel is much simpler than a will is! This is filled with misleading statements and assumptions, shame on you for using this kind of tactic to deneigrate persons who have enough COMPASSION to share the promise of eternal life in heaven with a person who has not yet received Christ. How in the world do you KNOW THAT SOMEONE DYING is not 'in possession' of their faculties? That is wicked, plain and simple.
  I then said: Q. We are told to not seek to be a teacher of scripture unless we are called to do so. Remember that there is a heavier responsibilty and weightier judgement for those who teach error or 'stumble others'.
  >A. Are you suggesting I 'stumble others' with my opinion? In my opinion, your arrogant presentation of "Christianity" does more harm.
  Your attacking of me and consistently siding with those who are unbelievers does 'stumble others'. I am not 'arrogant' because I give God the benefit of the doubt!
  >Then you said: BTW, I consider my gift to be "encourager". At least one poster here has thanked me for turning her to God and away from disillusionment.
  Praise God for that and I hope it is Him using you in this way. Now, let me tell you the rest of the story.
  My grandmother, a JW for fifty years, the one who introduced me to scripture, PRAYED TO RECIEVE JESUS ON HER DEATHBED. I got a lucid few minutes with her and she saw Jesus for the first time in her life, ON HER DEATHBED. She listened to a granson whom she had lost all hope in and shunned for years. My wife and I visited with her and she got saved by the Lord. JWs who were due to arrive about the time we were seeing her got wrong directions to the nursing home from my mother, another JW of many years who has given her heart to Jesus! Praise the Lord of Glory for what He does through those who believe in Him. The lesson herein: never doubt the saving power of the God of the Bible. Share your faith in season and out of season, just because it is possible a divine appointment!
  I don't hold your statements in unforgiveness. You had no way of knowing the rest of the story.
  Rex
• 

  Narkissos

  1 Corinthians 12:3: "I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God ever says "Let Jesus be cursed!" and no one can say "Jesus is Lord" except by the Holy Spirit."

  Ephesians 3:16ff: "I pray that, according to the riches of his glory, he may grant that you may be strengthened in your inner being with power through his Spirit, and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, as you are being rooted and grounded in love. I pray that you may have the power to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God."

  I understand that the above texts set an inclusive "Christian" standard by which all Christians should listen to and learn from one another rather than trying to judge who is a "true Christian" and who is not. True, not all NT texts hold to this standard. There is a lot of judgement going on, either between Paulinists and Judeo-Christians or between "Gnostics" vs. "Ecclesiastics". But that doesn't suppress the value of the inclusivistic approach.