Is repititive imprinting of ideas a primary cult tactic?

by hubert 144 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Abaddon
    Abaddon

    sweetscholar

    It is suprising someone who thinks they are as smart as you so obviously do can't figure out why someone with no belief in the Bible would be here. This site is mainly visited by EX-JW's.

    Now (places €50 bet on "throwing the baby out with the bathwater being in the next reply) AMAZINGLY enough, not all ex-JW's contnue to believe in the Bible. You totally ignored several reasons WHY many ex-JW's don't believe in the Bible as god's literal word anymore. It is historically innacurate, that's why.

    why is that you constantly dogmatically harp on my "tone" (which could be actually worse) instead of really addressing or seeing the actual specific points raised??
    Because you are a rude and arrogant twat. If you were in a bar you would be treated like this for behaving as you do. Why should we be nice to a sphincter we wouldn't be nice to in real life? YOU are the one who isn't responding to specific points raised. You blabber on about this scripture and that as though it MEANT something, like a Muslim blabbering on about the Qu'ran or a Hindu about various Vedic scriptures. When the accuracy of the Bible is questioned with specific examples, you ignore them. Either defend the Bible's historical accuracy or be thought of as an empty vessel.
    and called Pharisees "hypocrites" and "sons of the Devil".
    Well, you've already proven your hypocracy... if you are pushing a book that lies (as the Bible does), then you are also a 'son of the devil'. But I suppoose we were warned; it does say Satan will go round disguising himself as an angel of light. It does say we should judge a tree by its fruits. Seems you fail miserably to measure up as a Christian, judging by the fruitage you have displayed. Of course, rather than proving the Bible's historical accuracy, you will insult and blabber and rage. And we will laugh at you.
  • ellderwho
    ellderwho

    Sweetscholar what is/was the name of the organization that Jehovah was using after the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD.

    As Abaddon has called you on your inability to answer or respond to questions you claim others do not.

    Sweetscholar said: why is that you constantly dogmatically harp on my "tone" (which could be actually worse) instead of really addressing or seeing the actual specific points raised??
    EW
  • seattleniceguy
    seattleniceguy

    defd,

    Were you not also a Witness at one point in your life?

    Yes, I was before I knew all the facts. The primary reason I still have any interest in the Witnesses now is because I have family members (not to mention a few friends) that I care about who I would like to see attain mental freedom. Posting on the board is one contribution I make toward a future free of fundamentalism.

    SNG

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    sweetscholar,

    I don't mind discussing Korah with you. Who do you believe the Greater Moses is?

    If you say Jesus, I agree. If you say the Governing Body, we have nothing more to discuss as far as I'm concerned. I follow the lead of Jesus Christ, as Paul did, and I will not submit for "one hour" to a yoke of Israelitic tyrrany no matter whose face it wears.

    Galatians 1:6-9 — I marvel that YOU are being so quickly removed from the One who called YOU with Christ’s undeserved kindness over to another sort of good news. But it is not another; only there are certain ones who are causing YOU trouble and wanting to pervert the good news about the Christ. However, even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to YOU as good news something beyond what we declared to YOU as good news, let him be accursed. As we have said above, I also now say again, Whoever it is that is declaring to YOU as good news something beyond what YOU accepted, let him be accursed.

    Galatians 2:1-10 Then after fourteen years I again went up to Jerusalem with Bar´na·bas, taking also Titus along with me. But I went up as a result of a revelation. And I laid before them the good news which I am preaching among the nations, privately, however, before those who were outstanding men, for fear that somehow I was running or had run in vain. Nevertheless, not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, although he was a Greek. But because of the false brothers brought in quietly, who sneaked in to spy upon our freedom which we have in union with Christ Jesus, that they might completely enslave us—to these we did not yield by way of submission, no, not for an hour, in order that the truth of the good news might continue with YOU. But on the part of those who seemed to be something—whatever sort of men they formerly were makes no difference to me—God does not go by a man’s outward appearance—to me, in fact, those outstanding men imparted nothing new. But, on the contrary, when they saw that I had entrusted to me the good news for those who are uncircumcised, just as Peter [had it] for those who are circumcised—for He who gave Peter powers necessary for an apostleship to those who are circumcised gave powers also to me for those who are of the nations; yes, when they came to know the undeserved kindness that was given me, James and Ce´phas and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars, gave me and Bar´na·bas the right hand of sharing together, that we should go to the nations, but they to those who are circumcised. Only we should keep the poor in mind. This very thing I have also earnestly endeavored to do.

    See, I know you didn't read Galatians before responding to my post.

    Galatians 1:6-9 is direct instruction to be on the watch for and completely reject "new light," even if it comes from an angel out of heaven. Anyone who brings such light is trying to pervert the good news about the Christ.

    Galatians 2:1-10 is a trip down memory lane for Paul. He describes the meeting in Jerusalem (Acts 15) from his perspective. He didn't go up quietly for fear that he had run in vain because he thought he might be wrong. He knew he was right. He went up to tell them something, not to receive instructions from them.

    Is that how the modern GB works, or would Paul, Barnabas, and Tittus have been disfellowshipped for apostasy today? We both know the answer. According to the Bible they were not acting like Korah, Dathan, and Abiram or the 250 bearing incense holders. According to the tape "Respect Jehovah's Authority" they were. According to the Bible they were acting like Jehu, Phineas, Elijah, and Daniel. They were refusing to yeild their principles in the face of unrighteousness. They kept their integrity no matter the cost.

    That is considered apostasy by the organization you support. Not surprising really, considering most of their rules and regs come from the Mosaic Law (which was the POINT of the meeting described in Acts 15).

    John 9:18-34 — However, the Jews did not believe concerning him that he had been blind and had gained sight, until they called the parents of the man that gained sight. And they asked them: “Is this YOUR son who YOU say was born blind? How, then, is it he sees at present?” Then in answer his parents said: “We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. But how it is he now sees we do not know, or who opened his eyes we do not know. ASK him. He is of age. He must speak for himself.” His parents said these things because they were in fear of the Jews, for the Jews had already come to an agreement that, if anyone confessed him as Christ, he should get expelled from the synagogue. This is why his parents said: “He is of age. QUESTION him.”
    Therefore a second time they called the man that had been blind and said to him: “Give glory to God; we know that this man is a sinner.” In turn he answered: “Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know, that, whereas I was blind, I see at present.” Therefore they said to him: “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?” He answered them: “I told YOU already, and yet YOU did not listen. Why do YOU want to hear it again? YOU do not want to become his disciples also, do YOU?” At this they reviled him and said: “You are a disciple of that [man], but we are disciples of Moses. We know that God has spoken to Moses; but as for this [man], we do not know where he is from.” In answer the man said to them: “This certainly is a marvel, that YOU do not know where he is from, and yet he opened my eyes. We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is God-fearing and does his will, he listens to this one. From of old it has never been heard that anyone opened the eyes of one born blind. If this [man] were not from God, he could do nothing at all.” In answer they said to him: “You were altogether born in sins, and yet are you teaching us?” And they threw him out!

    You people are disciples of Moses, not Jesus Christ. I can show you how you keep the Law, and imperfectly, thus condemning yourselves as the Israelites condemned themselves by not keeping it fully. But then, maybe you know how often your organization reaches back to the Old Testament for support of its teachings. Maybe you know how strong a role the Mosaic Law plays in shaping your organization's theology. Maybe you know that "yoke of slavery" Paul spoke of in Galatians first hand.

    Your organization acts like Pharsisees, not like Christ. Christ would not choose them if he came to investigate today, much less in 1919.

    AuldSoul

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    As an aside, sweetscholar, if those few things were all that are necessary why does the current JW Talmud (WT Library CD-ROM) contain such extensive lists of what a mature Christian would and would not do. Do they have a specific mature Christian in mind? Because, if so, they don't make that clear.

    I see from your posts that you like to ignore direct questions and jump straight to whatever you want to talk about. I asked about Acts 15:22, 23. I asked for your explanation of three separate points. I lettered them so you could find them easily. You ignored them. If you prefer to preach at me instead of discuss with me then I just don't have the time to read what you write.

    You said the whole congregation was not involved. The Bible calls you a liar in verses 22 and 23. It specifies "apostles," "older men," and "the whole congregation." Would you like to explain why you disagree with the direct statements of the Bible while claiming to support its validity?

    AuldSoul

  • TD
    TD

    ---sweet"scholar"

    You still seem to be having a hard time with the difference between physical objects and abstractions. The ark would have been a tangible object. It would have had dimensions, it would have had weight and mass, you could have seen it, touched it, felt it, even banged your head on it if you weren't looking where you were going. Organizations are not physical objects. The two are neither comparable nor interchangable.

    Of course physically staying off of the ark would have physically excluded you from the ark, but that doesn't speak to the question of whether failure to join and support an organization would have excluded you from the ark. In other words, you still have not provided a shred of proof that there were any "strings" attached to the invitation to board this ark. Scriptures please.

    Your willingness to simply repeat your assertions coupled with your reticence to back them up from your Bible makes it appear that you have very little respect for your Bible, despite (Or perhaps because of) your apparent delusion of speaking with the authority of Jesus Christ. This is yet again, the behavior commonly associated with cults.

  • Apostanator
    Apostanator

    I wonder if sweetscholar realizes that the new world translation is copywrited by the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. If he does, then he should know that the WBTS changes the wording in their translation to fit their teachings....Which of course would make the NWT Null & Void. Truth is Truth my friend and if it's changed later then it wasn't the Truth to begin with.......Buyer Beware !!

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    Jesus is depicted in the Scriptures as the means for salvation. The congregation/organization has no saving power at all. Zip. Zero. Zilch.

    So, is Jesus the ark, or is the organization the ark? I know what I believe, but I wonder what sweetscholar believes? He probably thinks both are required for salvation.

    sweetscholar, to which organization did Cornelius and his household pledge allegiance before being anointed? (Acts 10:1-11:18) Where in the account of Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch do we see Philip asking first whether the Ethiopian Eunuch recognized God's Faithful and Discreet Slave or the authority of an oganization as a requisite for baptism? (Acts 8:26-40)

    Enjoy your reeducation!

    AuldSoul

  • sweetscholar
    sweetscholar

    wasn't the fact that Christ died for our sins (not just was resurrected to be King) but that He was atonement for mankind, "the grace of God" as it's called in Scripture "new light". progressive understandings and clarification? and of course it was "new light" that people did not have to circumcised and follow thoseo 613 Mosaic Law commandments, per se. I just use that stuff as an example that after Christ's death and resurrection, there was progressive understanding and refining and clarifications of things. if Russell and Rutherford were coming out of false denominations and darkness, and things got "brighter and brighter" then so what?? that's different than the Galatians thing, where it was discussing altering or totally totally "new" (hi, Book of Mormon) revelation (hi Muslim Koran) or totally totally new Gospel (hi Roman Catholic Church that says we need Mary's intercession) and stuff like that. that has nothing to do with as the prophets predicted "knowledge and refinement being increased". also, yes, Jesus is the Greater Moses, not the Governing Body of any church. but just as Moses appointed judges and priests and under-leaders, and so forth, so did Christ (the Apostles and Elders of His True Church) with central oversight. are we to overlook or constantly water down the governance that took place in Acts and in Paul's, James', and John's and Jude's and Peter's Epistles??? because it's not convenient for our position. if it wasn't a Christian "Council" in Acts 15 and so forth, then what was it? didn't they "COUNCIL" together, under the Holy Spirit, and discuss the matter and work it out. closed door or not. you're hung up on those types of particulars. the point is that it was not so "open" to just anyone either. when I'm talking about the general drift of the situation. the point is it was not this loose independent thing in the ultimate sense. sure, local congregations had a certain autonomous thing TO AN EXTENT, but Paul's letters and instructions and that of the Apostles and Elders, were BINDING on all the local Christian congregations scattered. a point that is not that hard to grasp.

  • sweetscholar
    sweetscholar

    I said they were involved with that specific thing, of sending representatives out. but not directly with deciding the circumcision issue and the "necessary thing" bound on all congregations matter. I said that very clearly. maybe you just didn't see that post. I don't know. but no, I did not purposely side-step that point. it was a good point. but please don't accuse me like that. I don't know why you didn't see that thing I wrote on it. I addressed it pretty clearly. I also said (and it seems you're overlooking the general drift of Acts 15 and overly focusing on just verse 22) that it was really the Apostles and Elders, not the rest of the congregation, that actually DECIDED the crucial matters, not just something like who would be sent out to deliver a message. maybe you just glossed over what I wrote. whatever. I'm saying it again now. again, people see what they generally want to see, not necessarily what all the facts (ALL of internal and external evidence) truly fully indicates. all of us have done that. witnesses included. it's just where is the weight of evidence ultimately? this hodg podge confusing mish-mosh Korah-like joke called "Christendom"?? or something a little more organized and centralized and Biblical and pure and un-worldly? think about it. peace.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit