by anonymous4 310 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Hi outlaw
Since 99% of current Bible translations have to conform to trinitarian exegesis to the detriment of purer translations of Bible texts from the original languages. I have no problem in saying it.
ehh you won't find any English word in the bible Outlaw they weren't written in English!
Debator: Yes prophecy is such an easy target because the wt can be prooven wrong. But lets leave that aside.
Why is it a loaded question to ask you if something the WT once printed is still true or not?
Hi Bohm
Because your agenda is very obvious!
Have we needed refinement from mistaken understandings in the past? yes and this we will admit ourselves.
Why is this answer not anough for you?
I won't use "right and wrong" or "true and false" when "Right" or "true" in regards to prophecy is impossible to prove until Armageddon.
Hi outlaw
Since 99% of current Bible translations have to conform to trinitarian exegesis to the detriment of purer
translations of Bible texts from the original languages. I have no problem in saying it.....debator/reniaa
And..
You would know that how?..
You have No Education in the Orginal Languages..You only know what the WBT$ tells you..
ehh you won't find any English word in the bible Outlaw they weren't written in English!......debator/reniaa
Yes,I know..They were written in Languages you have No Education in.
Do you work at being an Idiot,or does it just come Natural?..
......................
...OUTLAW
Debator: How on EARTH can my "agenda" have any bearing on the truth-value of what the watchtower printed 40 years ago?! Your basically saying: "Okay, i think if i answer your question, you can use it in an argument against me that i dont like. I wont answer your question". Thats a pretty weak way to win a debate.
Okay, lets try something else than prophecy. You wrote:
"When I check what Jehovah's witnesses believe and teach by both word and the literature it is all in line with Bible teachings"
Now consider this quote:
When men of science conclude that this normal process will no longer work and they suggest removing the organ and replacing it directly with an organ from another human, this is simply a shortcut. Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic. However, in allowing man to eat animal flesh Jehovah God did not grant permission for humans to try to perpetuate their lives by cannibalistically taking into their bodies human flesh, whether chewed or in the form of whole organs or body parts taken from others." (The Watchtower, Nov. 15, 1967, p. 702)
So two questions: (1) Is the above correct? (2) Is it "all in line with bible teachings"?.
Please consider the questions one in a time, and point out which (if any) are loaded and if so why.
Debator says: "Giving credit to God is not claiming inspiration."
Acts 1:8 "BUT YOU WILL RECIEVE POWER WHEN THE HOLY SPIRIT ARRIVES, UPON YOU........."
this is the example they use to describe the holy spirit on page 31 in the Oct 1, 2010 WT
The WTS go beyond giving credit to God. On Page 31 in the Oct 1, 2010 WT it states: " That the international preaching work is an indentifying mark of those truly empowered by holy spirit. "
Debator, Holy spirit cannot be separate from inspiration, Holy spirit causes things to become, it causes one to move and to act upon.
Where does the WTS policy on blood and other life altering edits come from if not inspired from God ???????
Well goody goody goody!
The trinity was brought up...YAY!
Taken from TNWT (gag-tastic)
Genesis1:26 - And God went on to say: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every moving animal that is moving upon the earth.”
Genesis 3:22 - And Jehovah God went on to say: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad, and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take [fruit] also from the tree of life and eat and live to time indefinite,—”
Genesis 11:7 - Come now! Let us go down and there confuse their language that they may not listen to one another’s language.”
So God is speaking to whom when he says "Let us make man in OUR image....." "Here the man has become one of US in knowing....." " Come now! Let US go down......”
So, whom is God talking to?? Himself? Does God have a split personality?
Hi 3mygod
1 john 5:7 additions, John 1:1, absence of YHWH/Jehovah nearly 7000 times, Cross instead of stauros/stake and the list goes on.....
Go have fun with trinitarian theology that has rewritten the majority of translations today. Before you throw stones of personal opinion at the NWT - Debator
My darling debator - I would like to comment on the fact that you are worried about Jehovah's name being removed from the bible. As I sit here and I read from my King James Version (I like it old world style bitches) and I quote - Psalms 83:13 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JE-HO'-VAH, art the most high over all the earth. Seems that my bible still has it in there. Hmm...
And now, let's move on to something else. How about you go through TNWT bible and you count how many times "grace" was taken out and it was replaced with "undeserved kindness" - that right there...Debbie Downer, negative connotation. God gives you something that you don't deserve, so you better appreciate it and live your life shouting at the tops of your voice that JEHOVAH loves you when you have done nothing to deserve it.
I choose to look at it this way: God loves me, no matter what. He loved me so much that he sent his son to die a slow horrible agonizing death to redeem mankind, all of us. God created beauty every where and in every single human....for what? So that we can label and degrade his creations as "worldly" and "unfit association"
And I wonder why Jehovah's Witnesses are so worried about the fact that other bibles that haven't been translated by JEHOVAH"s WITNESSES don't have a word that was so sacred to man that they stopped using it. Being in the truth isn't about loving God, it's about being a follower of a cult and being blinded to a real and true relationship with God. I want NOTHING to do with any religion. I have a relationship with my God. One that loves me no matter what, one that wants me to enjoy this life and wants me to share how amazing my life is now that I have found him. Not some drummed up political (and yes my darling, being a Jehovah's Witness is all about the politics) bull shit that at the end of the day is nothing more than a very well oiled and organized hoax.
The biggest apostate site on the net, and I am singled out as the person with an "agenda" that somehow prevents Debator from giving an honest answer to my question.
well.
You heard it from the horses mouth, your all second-class apostates compared to the mighty BOHM against whom the truth can only be defended by not offering any defence!
No seriously debator, "Do unto others as you would like them to do onto you". consider what we write you and we will in return consider what you write back. Answer my questions honestly, without second-guessing my motives, and i will answer your questions directly and honestly.
Dodging questions, evading, giving half-answers, not trusting the other side -- those are the things i (and i think you to!) attach to dishonest politicians. Is that really how you want to defend the truth? Is that really satisfying?
MANY things i have written have been shown to be false. its human nature to err, i merely hope you will aknowledge that the watchtower has written things that have been more or less false from time to time. Those things were not "in line with the bible", and we can then have a debate on what teachings are in line with the bible today, what the bible exactly is and if the bible reflects the words of a God.
And if you dont, im gonna go Dogbert your ass, but now its time to go to sleep.
debator
nice try! but everything is from God humbleness is not a sin.
1 peter 4:11
If anyone speaks, they should do so as one who speaks the very words of God.
Giving credit to God is not claiming inspiration.
You really twist things around Debator. Giving credit to God for words that are spoken when later they are changed and admitted to being wrong then they can't be speaking God's words in the first place. That would make it very much a dishonour to God.
What do you mean everything is from God? It cannot be from God when his word from the bible is added to, misinterpreted, misconstued, twisted, taken out of context and manipulated and then given credit back to him. It is wrong.
Humbleness is taking God's word and clearly explaining that any interpretation of those words is acknowledged as being not from God, but their own human understanding and open to further clarification. Do they do this? Most of the time, no. Even worse, they put the onus on God as being his words.
"If anyone speaks, they should do so as one who speaks the very words of God". This means that they should only speak those words that can be and are from God. If they are wrong then they should not have spoken.
