Bad Associations spoil useful habits. Are the JWs right? Scripturally? (page 2)

That's a little different flavor than most of the other translations I looked at. I think it (slightly) obscures the message that the other translations make pretty clear.

Here's the NIV:

33Do not be misled: "Bad company corrupts good character."

The New American Standard Bible

33(A)Do not be deceived: "Bad company corrupts good morals."

and finally the New King James Version:

33 Do not be deceived: “Evil company corrupts good habits.”

I'll stop there.

Having chewed on this for a few hours, I think I've stumbled upon a little bit more clarity.

Here's where the Watchtower takes this passage and puts it on steroids.

1. Whatever Paul said was "God breathed" so it carries just as much weight as what Jesus said.

2. Paul wasn't talking about people who were axe murderers and rapists, he was talking about people who had a different belief concerning the resurrection.

3. Here's the big Watchtower logic-leap: Anyone who does not embrace the body of Christian belief as taught by the FDS, is Bad Association. The Great Apostasy hadn't yet occured when Paul wrote to the Corinthians, but it certainly has now. So the message is clear, anyone who doesn't share our beliefs is not a good person to have as a close associate.

Fundamentalists are almost as narrow, but not quite.

1. If you don't believe in the resurrection, you can't be my close friend. But at least you don't have to go to same church as I do.

More liberal Christians widen the net a bit.

1. The Bible contains SOME of God's thoughts, but you've gotta keep your own common sense filters on when you read it.

2. Paul had a stick up his butt on a lot of issues and needs to be taken with a big grain of salt.

3. Jesus' words, provided they really were his, are good stuff. But there is a good chance some of what he said got lost in translation so don't get too worked up about "hating your family" and stuff like that.

And then you have guys like me.

The Bible is worth knowing about due to it's huge cultural impact, but anything I read in it has to pass my own rationality test before I give it any weight. Oh no! I'm putting myself above God and will burn forever now.

Thanks for all the input so far.

om

bobld

Is a person who upholds bible principles a bad (association) person?

Bob

PS:I meant to say, association with Jehovah's Witnesses spoil useful habits.

jaguarbass

I think the Jw's are right about bad associations spoiling useful habits.

Thats biblical not JW.

You are the captain of your vessel.

If you dont want to be a drug addict, dont hang around drug addicts.

If you dont want to be a theif, dont hang around theifs.

If you dont want to drink, dont hang around a bar.

If you dont want to get a hair cut. Dont hang around the barber shop.

WTWizard

It all depends on the definition one uses for "bad". I will use the most basic one--a bad person is one that consistently and volitionally does things that are bad for society, and particularly one that habitually and volitionally initiates the use of force, threat of force, and/or fraud against other people.

Obviously, using that definition, Jehovah's Witlesses do not follow the scripture. Otherwise, they would quit associating with the leaders. The leaders consistently defraud people into thinking that they are going to die unless they join their organization, and then use guilt to coerce people into doing ever more. They threaten people with death, in a graphic depiction, if they do not join the organization and stay there. Obviously, they are threatening force and fraud.

This is even worse than the common criminal. While a criminal's acts are bad, they never cite it as for the common good. The Filthful and Disgraceful Slavebugger, on the other hand, cites their criminal acts of fraud and death threats as for the common good. Obviously, that puts them among the worst possible associations. And, anyone that wholeheartedly pushes that message on people is bad associations for as long as they are actively pushing it.

sf

In this article, {somewhere....I can't seem to find the quote} your governing body asks you outright: "...are you wise or stupid...for [even] associating with "apostates/ opposers"...:

GUARD AGAINST DECEPTION {FEB. 15, 2004 WT}

And now after reading that thread, which ARE you...wise or stupid?

sKally

jgnat

My pastor taught me that "scripture balances scripture". You get a finer meaning by comparing them to scriptures that seem to advise differently. I think others have pointed out it matters on the definition and degree of "badness". There's people I avoid for obvious reasons. They are sharks who would rip out my backside if I was unwary. But I don't avoid everyone who thinks differently than me. I welcome their perspective.

There are several stories that come to mind. Jesus associated with all sorts. Also, Peter was specifically told to associate with the gentiles, "What I have called clean, do not call unclean." I take that to mean that Jesus, his sacrifice, and the explosion of belief that followed, was to be inclusive.

Mark 9:38-40 - Do not forbid a stranger from doing good works in Jesus' name, "for he that is not against you is for you."

Acts 10:10-17 - Peter's vision of the unclean animals, God calls them clean.

John 4:7-29 - Jesus converses with a Samaritan woman.

There was also the leper, the centurion (Matthew 8:5), the woman with the issue of blood (Matthew 9:20), the harlot (John 11:12), and the tax collector (Luke 5:27). Jesus conversed and ate with them all.

Bad Associations spoil useful habits. Are the JWs right? Scripturally?

Share this