2nd attempt - Big AHA moment for me ! (page 2)

godrulz

The Bible does contrast believers being in the truth (being in the Truth, Christ, and the body of sound doctrine) vs being in darkness, error, etc.

Jn. 14:6 does show that we are saved by a person, not a church or organization.This is why one can be saved by faith in Christ, not by theological excellence or conformity/uniformity with a fallible organizations like Catholic church (Popery), LDS/Mormon (modern 'prophets'), or JW/WT/GB. Evangelicals do not have a pope, prophet, or GB. Our faith is based on Sola Scripture (Reformational Scripture alone; properly translated/interpreted/applied).

If JWs had truth, they could claim to be in the truth without denying Jesus, the Truth, even if they are not infallible (like the early church which also had doctrinal disputes, divisions, etc.). If evangelicals are on the right track, they also can follow the person of Christ as supreme truth and claim to be in the truth vs in darkness (worshipping false idols, gods, false teachings, etc.). The Bible is not afraid to emphasize sound doctrine and warn about false doctrine, so neither should we be afraid to defend and proclaim truth (which does not mean we are infallible on every point, but at least right on core, essential truth like the doctrine of God/Christology/soteriology=salvation).

Lozhasleft

Godrulz erm... .....no sorry ...I prefer Jesus's simple words.

Loz x

tec

Our faith is based on Sola Scripture (Reformational Scripture alone; properly translated/interpreted/applied)

I'm sorry, Godrulz, but this is your pope, prophet, or GB.

My faith is based on Christ. Period. Do I make mistakes? Absolutely. But nothing else takes His place. Some things (such as writings in the Bible) might tell about Him and even contain the things He said. But the bible is not Christ either. He alone is the Truth.

Tammy

GOrwell

I'm sure the "in the truth" phrase goes back probably at least 50 or 60 years. I'd love to find the background on this phrase, but I doubt it's "grass-roots" in any way.

WontLeave

Our faith is based on Sola Scripture (sic)

You've lost your mind, if you think your man-made dogmas fit the definition of sola scriptura. All you do is quote creeds and church doctrine, while arbitrarily stapling unrelated Bible verses to it for "proof". You're a charlatan and your beliefs are shams. I've pointed out over and over how your cited verses don't say anything about what you're blathering on about.

You think this is our first rodeo? I was on to that trick the first time I saw the Watchtower bashing oral sex by shoehorning in some scriptures about brothels and homosexuality. So, is my wife supposed to be my gay lover or a whore? Just because you invoke a verse from the Bible doesn't make what you're saying true. The Devil did a lot better appying Scripture to Jesus and he was rebuked for it.

godrulz

Loz, I affirm the simple words of Jesus.

Tet, the Bible that Jesus quoted also says that 'thy word/Scripture is truth' (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16, etc.). It is both/and, not either/or, the Written and Living Word. Scripture is God's self-revelation, inspired, infallible, authoritative. We worship Jesus, not the Bible (bibliolatry). Jesus is the Truth, but He also quoted Scripture as God's truth.

wontleave, I thought you were female, not male. I believe in sound hermeneutics (the art and science of Bible interpretation). This does not mean that any person, especially me and GB, are infallible. Creeds can express biblical truth, but they can also be wrong. The creed that affirms one God vs many gods is biblically correct. The WT also systematizes beliefs and often proof texts verses out of context to support error. That does not mean that everyone who quotes a verse exegetes/interprets it wrong. Pointing out bad interpretation and proof texting does not negate the possibility of sound Bible interpretation in context. We would have to look at any given verse/issue in more detail. We cannot assume we are both right or wrong on every issue. We actually have agreement on many verses/issues, just not the Christocentric, essential ones (and only one of us is right vs both).

Jn. 3:16 is straightforward, but we have to formulate a doctrine of God (triune or solitary) and Christology (Creator or creature) based on all relevant verses in context (and with a credible translation, thus excluding NWT).

Lozhasleft

Over the years I have heard so many expressions relating to the JWs and the 'truth' - thats undeniable. Things like:

'You know it's the truth'

'Noone else has the truth'

and variations of the same.

For me this contraverts Jesus's claim ' I AM THE TRUTH '

Its a simple matter. As far as I can see Jesus wrote that as a disclaimer for anyone else who claimed to be 'the truth'. They can't be, because only he is. End of. And I like it.

Loz x

godrulz

Truth does refer to Jesus. He is the embodiment of truth. The word is also used in the Bible about Scripture and the body of doctrine held by the early church. Using the phrase 'truth' is not the problem. It is a false group claiming to be truth when they are not (becomes false buzz word). Theocracy is not a word used in the Bible, but it is a biblical concept, just not exactly like JWs envision it.

wobble

If you are one of those who puts great store on what the "original" Greek said, then Jesus is claiming the word as a special title, or at the very least, a special adjective, that belongs to Him only, He says in effect "I am The Way, The Truth and The Life".

I am sure that the vast majority of those who style themselves as "Christian" would agree those words apply to Jesus exclusively.

Everything the Governing Body claim for themselves goes against this. They demand idolatrous worship of themselves as all of those three things.

godrulz

Many other verses also say the written Word of God is truth. Jesus is the embodiment of Truth, but the written Word (vs Living Word) also reveals truth from God (the word has a semantical range of meaning/application depending on the context).

The bottom line is that we can be saved by faith in a person without needing faith and loyalty in/to an organization (Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12). WT and Catholics are wrong to make salvation conditional on a 'mother' organization/church (fallible). Ask a JW if they can be saved apart from 'Jehovah's' organization. The official answer from GB would be no. The Bible answer is a resounding yes (hence the difference between cult and Christian). No manmade organization is a mediator between God and man. Only Christ Jesus is the mediator and one can be saved apart from identification with any church/organization since it is about grace/faith, not externals (I Tim. 2:5). Newsflash: the WT/GB is not a mediator nor is it a faithful and discreet slave (that parable has nothing to do with how they apply it).

2nd attempt - Big AHA moment for me !

Share this