a falacy ?

by BATHORY 3 Replies latest jw friends

  • BATHORY
    BATHORY

    G'Day all,

    I was showering this arvo and thought of something i would like the groups opinion on.

    The org likes throwing the word apostate around because it effectively ellicits a predetermined response that may be advantageous for the point they are making at the time.

    Now by their definition or generic garden variety jw personel definition, it is a peson that BELIEVED and HAD the doctronal truth THEN has abandoned it for some other belief.

    If that is our accepted working definition to their frame of reference
    then when their beliefs ( invariably only the big'ens ) change or get adjusted, how then is this not a move to apostacy. The core of this question is relating to the qualification of absolute truth. This is so clear to me, why can others see it also.

    Im sure many of you mongrols here were Defecated out of gods org for things that now would not be a D'f offence ( in principle ).

  • Prisca
    Prisca

    I was showering this arvo
    Is it February already?

  • Amazing
    Amazing

    The root meaning of Apo-stasia is to "stand away from." Its close relative is Apo-stasion meaning to divorce. The Greek word "Apostasia" is only used three of four places in the New testament. It can mean anything from a simple change from one system or group to another, or it can mean total rebellion.

    A Democrat leaves the party and joins the Republicans, she/he is an Apostate from the Democrates. A person who divorces their mate is an Apostates from that mate.

    Apostasy is not about views or doctrine directly, although these certainly are involved ... rather it is about our relationship with and committment or loyal to some system or arrangement or person or group.

    There is nothing wrong with 'standing-away' from something. It is a simple Greek verb form, though not used as much in modern Greek. The sin of 'Apostasy' is always charged by the ones, the persons or group left behind.

    There is no Biblical sin of Apostasy from Jesus Christ. We are never told in the Bible that leaving one group of professed Christians and joining another Christian group makes us a disloyal rebel (apostate) to Jesus Christ. We are only told in 2nd John to not deal wiht those who have left the "Teaching" of Christ. Not to shun them, but do not wish them well in their work. In that discussion in 2nd John Apostasion was never used - simply because leaving a "Teaching" is not 'Apostasy.'

    You cannot directly commit "Apostasy" to a teaching, because a 'Teaching' is a point of view. The precision of Greek with respect to 'Apo-stasia' is about physical location or the proximity of our relationship to a person or place or group.

    Jehovah's Witnesses are 'apostates' from other Christians because they partition themselves off into an exclusive sect or cult. Whereas other Christian denominations, while disagreeing on various teachings accept one another's fellowship - therefore, they are not Apostates. Baptists will meet with Methodists and pentecostals or Assembly of God at a common Christian event. Ecumenism among Christians is a movement away frm "Apostasy" whereas "Exclusivism" is a movement toward Apostasy. JWs are among the purest Apostates - in the classical Greek sense.

    Now isn't that simple?

  • dmouse
    dmouse

    Ah well, it's only apostacy if you turn against CURRENT 'truth'.

    And then again - it's not the disagreements over doctrine but the fact that you dared to question them at all which really pisses 'em off. You see, as long as you 'wait on Jehovah' and keep your gob shut the rest is irrelevent.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit