by mankkeli 171 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
JWN does have a doctrine, Most oy of my posts have been deleted several times without a single explanation from the moderator, JWN has 11 posting guidelines and threads are closely being monitored to clamp down on violators. So, I disagree with you.
I meant a religious doctrine, and you know that perfectly well.
Also, you did not need an explanation from a moderator to tell you why that nasty thread you started against OUTLAW got nipped in the bud.
My heart goes out to those who lost their relatives. But note this, No doctor would provide 100% assurance of survival to patient even if He/She agreed to a transplant, so it is all about a trial and error.
That is true there is no 100% assurance. However they would have had a chance. This chance was denied them.
Therefore there can be no joy for the relatives that the position on these matters was changed. Wouldn't you agree mankkeli?
I meant a religious doctrine, and you know that perfectly well.
The word doctrine is always used in reference to something that is taught. Posting guidelines are instructional, but not actually taught. You can't call posted rules doctrine unless they are taught in some other context besides when people are reading the rules on the wall.
-Sab
The posting guidelines are included at the bottom of every post because they provide sufficient language to inform the poster of the general rules. Anything posted in regards to the guidelines are an elaboration of the posted rules. If a rule is broken the post that broke it can be deleted and there is no need for the moderators to do anything but "point to the rules." These guidelines are designed for a specific purpose and are agreed upon by every post. In no reality could they be considered doctrine no matter how much anyone wants to stretch it.
-Sab
Sab - this guy thinks he can school everybody on the board about the intricate detail of JW doctrine -
BUT - he cannot figure out why his threads get pulled.
Jeez...
I think he should take up debating in his native tongue, whatever that actually is, because he is clearly underwhelming when he tries it in english.
-Sab
sab -- i am sure the translaters at his university would translate his finnish gibberish into english gibberish.
Mankkeli - you possess a gaping disconnect between what is written and what you interpret as the meaning.
I have no "expectation" of the Bible and doctrine. I was highlighting a false statement in the Reasoning book that Bible has clear statements of truth that only they understand, and I backed up that statement by the ongoing changes to Watchtower doctrine.
Your comparison with science is ridiculous. Science makes no claim to be inerrant truth, written by an omnipotent, omniscient being.
"The fact that doctrines keep changing is not enough substantial evidence to dismiss the WT's divine approval,"
Wrong again. If you knew the bible was full of lies and mistruths you would not accept it as having divine approval, yet you do with the Watchtower. Why the different yardstick? If you let the Watchtower off that easily, then you need to be equally permissive with all other religions.
hey manny - the jdubs arrive at their explanation of the bible by WRITING THIER OWN VERSION OF THE BIBLE.
i will not let this FACT be swept under the carpet or lost in the jumble of posts.
address my answer, for it is the correct one.
next question for you - since the jdubs have written thier own version of the bible, is it wise to follow it? isn't this situation comparable to the book of mormon?
nobody but a jdub would recommend the NWT to anyone. it's right in the title - new world. nwo. rewrite the bible and control the people. satans design.
THE JDUBS WROTE THEIR OWN BIBLE.
served.
They arrive at their explanation of the Bible through the pages of Watchtower publications. The "faithful and discreet slave" is an illustration Jesus used--where he does not mention 1919, a governing body, or any other books to explain scripture--as an invention for the sake of granting men authority.
Certainly the Bible does not mention dates like 1914, or even 607 B.C. In fact, it mentions no dates we can connect to our calendar. So the chronology is a human invention, the result of taking verses out of their original context and assigning them a meaning beyond the authors' intent.
The Bible does not mention that a group of anointed Christians will help apply the value of the ransom to the rest of mankind. It does mention Jesus doing that, but not anyone else.
The Bible does not say that birthdays are evil just because a couple of murders happened on someone's birthday. Given how detailed God was with like everything else, if he'd wanted to tell us birthdays are wrong, he'd just say it, not go all passive-aggressive, guilt-by-association with it.
The Bible does not say that the generation of anointed ones whose lives overlap with the generation of anointed ones who saw 1914 will not pass away before the end comes.
The Bible does not say that men must shave their beards and that women cannot wear pants.
The Bible does not say that we have to report how many hours we spent preaching to others to a body of elders every month. Much less reporting books, booklets, magazines, return visits, etc.
The Bible says to not forsake gathering ourselves together, it does not say to gather for five meetings a week, two yearly assemblies, and one district convention.
Yet, Jehovah's Witnesses believe these are all Bible teachings. So obviously, the source has to be something other than the Bible. Like the Watchtower publications.
But it's futile to continue this debate. There won't be any reasoning with some folks, and that's fine. I just had to get it out of me.
--sd-7
