Did someone try to bait me? They must not be very good at it....
Imperfection is irrelevant. Who has the right to rule?
No one has addressed the Fact..
That the WBT$ has set themslves up,as Gods Personal Spokesman..
Who gave the WBT$ the Right,to Claim that Title?..
The WBT$ Governing Body,is a Farce!!..
The entire JW Religion is based on:.."Because we said so!!"
Based on your last post here, your own personal understanding of the Bible (apart from what the GB says) is that the Trinity doctrine is incorrect.
What would you do if the GB suddenly directed that we should now Believe in the Trinity?
since the Trinity (with 3 persons in a Godhead) is refuted in the Bible, those who would espouse that Trinity would NOT have the right to rule.
The converse is also true, in as much as a group understands the spirit of the Bible correctly, I believe that such a group has the right to rule.
ok, Spike...you just made a point...you understand the bible to refute the trinity. So you feel those who subscribe to that would not be fit leaders. You also stated the converse is true (if that understanding is wrong and the trinity is correct nontrinitarians would be disqualified to rule).
Fair enough. What would you, persoanlly do, if the GB announced tomorrow that after further research of the Scriptures they have come to see and accept the triune nature of God. I am not asking the likelihood, I am asking what you would do IF that happened. What would be your position?
I don't want to see this thread become a debate about the trinity. Let's agree that some people believe the Bible absolutely denies the trinity and this is an important point for them in choosing a religion, while others believe the Bible shows the opposite. I believe the relevant question, then, how many doctrines must a religion get right in order to prove that they have God's backing? How many are they allowed to get wrong?
Sorry, didn't mean to make it sound like palmtree's question isn't relevant. Totally is.
If the Trinity is refuted, so is the insertion of "Jehovah" 237 times.
Spike, you can't pick and choose what "insertions" you wish to refute. If a supporter of the trinity, which has as its root the divinity of Christ, cannot claim their god in your eyes, neither can you claim that Jehovah has the right to rule. This is because the only religion to insert Jehovah in the New Testament are Jehovah's Witnesses.
While it has been argued that the name should appear when quoted, the fact is, it doesn't appear in the manuscripts when quoting from the OT.
Point? We are bouncing around a question, whose right to rule. You jump to the trinity. I will jump you right back to the non existent Jehovah of the New Testament, a god, who is so powerless, he couldn't make sure that his name was in their once!
And the GB wants to claim "Jehovah" as their god? Their right to power is just as real as Jehovah's, that is, it isn't there.
Hi there bluecanary. Thanks for focusing us...
The amount of doctrines a religion must get right to prove they are the true religion? Spike? Reinaa? I am awaiting your thoughtful replies.
Blue, I wasn't derailing into a debate about the Trinity.
I want to see whether Reniaa follows an organization OR her own bible trained conscience, which I think is relevant to this discussion.
Would anybody follow the GB if they required belief in something that you personally do not feel is bible based?