Because I have not been here before, but why should you believe me?
Sad and hilarious at the same time.
The evidence is prophesy fullfilled.
Ok, you're just trolling now.
right and your not
That is what I hate the most a double standard
Because I disagree with you, I'm trolling?
OK, sorry sir, my evidence for me is prophesy fullfilled
Ok, name one prophecy that has been fulfilled.
1 Thessalonians 5:3 http://biblos.com/1_thessalonians/5-3.htm
It is the promise of "peace and security" that the Watchtower promises. Because the Governing Body has taken the place of Jesus, the Prince of peace, there will be "destruction upon them" and they will not flee (the translation says they will not escape, but if I am right it means flee) Do YOU see them fleeing from the Governing Body? I am not going to name another one because like I said, it is vanity.
Exactly. So YOU THINK it means the GB. JWs THINK it means a political development. Other christians, who have no connection with the JWs probably THINK it means something else entirely. Not a "fulfilled prophecy". Not a "prophecy" at all. Just words that can fit whatever people want them to mean. I rest my case. Debating this is rather pointless.
Pointless is what vanity means. We agree on something.
*** rs p. 202 Jehovah’s Witnesses ***
Are Jehovah’s Witnesses a sect or a cult?
Some define sect to mean a group that has broken away from an established religion. Others apply the term to a group that follows a particular human leader or teacher. The term is usually used in a derogatory way. Jehovah’s Witnesses are not an offshoot of some church (What??? Ever heard of the Millerites? The "Great Disappointment?" Barbour and Russell's offshooting from Seventh Day Adventism??? Heck--JWs even share "common ancestry" to the Branch Davidians!) but include persons from all walks of life and from many religious backgrounds (OK, does anyone else see the bait and switch here? While totally IGNORING the history of its origins, they make one claim about not being an offshoot and then defend it with a statement that has NOTHING to do with the original claim!!!).
Does this formula make sense? Let's try it:
"Star Trek The Next Generation wasn't a spinoff from the original Star Trek series, rather, it has a mutli-cultural fan base and is enjoyed by millions around the globe."
I thought by now someone would have mentioned B.I.T.E. thoroughly explained on this site.
Apply this to JW's and try to argue it's not a cult.