I spoke to a member of the HLC for 2 hours on Saturday....... (page 2)

M.J.

Next time, maybe hit him with something like this:

Paul in Galatians 1:8 makes an interesting assertion. Paul specifically writes here that if an apostle of God or an angel from heaven teaches Christians something beyond the established "good news", then that person, human or spirit, should be rejected. This is really something when you think about it. It really, in principle, means that even if someone at one time had been used for God's purpose, it does not automatically mean that from then on, every position they take or instruction they give is in accord with God's purpose! Look at the Apostle Peter, for example. At one point, Paul had to choose between what was true and right in God's eyes and the actions and teachings of a prominent apostle of God. But Paul set aside all of this when he felt it was necessary to condemn Peter "face to face" in Galatians 2:11. Why, because "he was blameworthy"! This was an apostle who had walked with Jesus--an apostle whom Jesus himself in John 21:15-17 had entrusted the feeding of his "sheep"!

Question: If a conflict develops between respecting the high value Jehovah places on human life, as established in scripture, and following the instruction of those in authority over the organization, what is the proper course according Galatians 1:8?

Because Saul was Jehovah's "anointed" king, and David was to replace him, David did not take it upon himself to raise his hand against Saul and become blood guilty by causing Saul's death. He Waited On Jehovah and in time, Saul was killed, and David became King. 1 Samuel 24:5-6 and 26:8-9.

On the other hand Saul wanted David’s death. David did not obey Jehovah’s anointed and submit to his execution as directed by Jehovah’s organization.

Question: If we are to obey those God anoints even while they're in error, why didn’t God punish or become angry with David for his disobedience?

Exodus 32:1-4 describes the golden calf incident. Aaron -- in Moses' absence -- was the "visible organization" of that time. Aaron built the calf, erected the altar, and called for a worship service at a specific time and place. So "God's organization" of that time called for something that God himself would not approve of.

These are just a couple of examples from the Old Testament. The books of Judges, Chronicles, and Kings recount how time and again Jehovah’s anointed people, kings, and religious leaders – his organization - again and again fell into disobedience and idolatry.

When Jesus arrived on the scene, the Jewish religious leaders represented Jehovah’s earthly organization. However, their many rules were condemned by Jesus himself as "teachings of men." Jesus never once admonished the people to submit to these men. In fact, he rebuked these men in the strongest of terms for adding restrictions and strict interpretations of the law that went far beyond the law’s intent. Matthew 12:1-7, Matthew 23:13-33.

Question: In all these cases, would the people that obeyed the organization be acceptable to God, even if following may have violated their own conscience? What was important in these cases, following the "right" course, or following the direction of God's visible organization?

Question: Is there any instance in the scriptures where God has EVER given this sort of authority to men over other men? Has God EVER expected men to obey a human He chose as His special servant even if they acted beyond their authority? When they acted in error? Against the conscience of the people His special servant is given authority over? Or to the point of sacrificing themselves or their children?

(special thanks to Check Your Premises for much of this)

buffalosrfree

fifi40, Unfortunately, talking to anyone from an HLC or any elder for that matter is like trying to get an correct algebra answer out of a 1 yr old. They can't answer anything that they haven't been told how to answer. Any quite honestly don't have the personal integrity to do what is right. They only do what the Borg wants them too. That is one reason I never give out my religion when going to a hospital, I don't want any of them fools around and I sure as hell don't think any medical condition I have is any of their business.

Jim_TX

"...That seemed to be his general conclusion.......if we havent got it right it will in time get sorted......."

Using this sort of logic - couldn't one argue that even the Catholics (or fill in your favorite religion) could 'get it right' eventually? If so - then why should one be so concerned about religion to begin with?

I mean... if religion's right or wrong is not the issue... if 'they'll get it right eventually' is... then any religion will do.

Regards,

Jim TX

M.J.

Yes, that sort of reasoning works on an issue like, say, did Christ die on a cross or stake?

But this is an issue where people are DYING in the meantime, and going through much pain, hardship, and suffering while the organization is trying to get things "right"!

is there any excuse for that?

drew sagan

If they are willing to say 'they haven't got it right yet' then why don't they stop acting like they do?

The members are simply ignorant of all the issues facing them. They hide behind bad reasoning to stay clear of tough questions.

That's what I did.

M.J.

Exactly. If the issue is unclear, then stop acting like its clear! Especially when your shaky position clearly kills people!

bigmouth

"...That seemed to be his general conclusion.......if we havent got it right it will in time get sorted......."

Using this sort of logic - couldn't one argue that even the Catholics (or fill in your favorite religion) could 'get it right' eventually? If so - then why should one be so concerned about religion to begin with?

I mean... if religion's right or wrong is not the issue... if 'they'll get it right eventually' is... then any religion will do.

I'm going to write this down and remember it!

fifi40

Hmmm.....Gill you have his measure I am sure..........he actually told me recent and old JW gossip as well.

I dont know what to think really........maybe there is more I coulda/shoulda said but I lack experience in anti JW arguments..........I think he got the point though.......he said to my husband before leaving that he realised he was not getting anywhere which I am sure pleased my atheist husband immensely......totally eliminating the opportunity for me to wind up hubby and tell him I was thinking of going back...

His parting shot is you have my tel numbers if you want to call me and I shall call again (which I doubt)....

I think his intention is probably honest and genuine but his teaching is totally misguided.

I spoke to a member of the HLC for 2 hours on Saturday.......

Share this