Interesting cross reference
Come on Steel, don't get yourself all worked up.
I don't think it's that we are "as lazy about the bible as when" we were in. Truth is, I did deep digging into bible teachings once I left JW world. From there I realized that there were valid arguments on both sides of the "Is Jesus God" isle. Depending on what texts one uses, they can prove that Jesus is Jehovah, or not.
The same can be said about heaven vs earth, holy spirit an individual or not, hellfire or not, resurrection spiritual or carnal..and various others doctrines. The bible is just not clear about those subjects and either side could be proved depending on what verses one chooses to use.
Realizing this lead me to question if anyone can really ever know exactly what the bible really teaches about any of these subjects.
Regardless of my beliefs, WT is wrong, I'm sure we can agree on that.
The writer of Hebrews clearly believed that the Son was fully divine, but a distinct person from the Father, both being YHWH. The writer of John and Colossians shared the same view.
Other writings in the New Testament reflect different theologies. For the writer of Mark, Jesus was a fully human messiah with human parents adopted as the son of God. The writers of Matthew and Luke introduced the idea of the virgin birth, of Jesus not having a human father, thus being God's son because God miraculously causes his birth.
Steel responded to my second comment as follows:
"Its sad to see ex jws are just as lazy about the bible as when they were in."
With a tweak here and there this could be a perfect sentence for JW organization's literature for young children, as in, "It makes Jehovah sad when people are lazy-minded and pick holes in His Word, the Bible."
This is a hallmark case of, When in doubt as to how to respond to someone whose views you disagree with, resort to ad hominen attacks on their attitude or character. It implies that only those who are lazy about the bible will have doubts about it. Hmmmm. That does sound eerily JW-ish - in fact, it reeks of fundamentalist head-in-the-sand ignorance about criticism of the Bible.
Also other comments Steel makes about agnostics and athiests having nothing to offer are absolutely ludicrous.
Again, parallels with JW organization are astonishingly clear: The equivalent is the way JWs deny a voice to any who question, doubt or criticize JW organization's literature: "You question the role of the Governing Body - you have nothing to offer us."
Steel, you need to lift the quality of the reasoning - because it it scarily close to that used by JWs and other fundamentalists who seek to exclude any heterodox voice from the discussion.
I know you started this thread and are understandably protective of your interests and don't want it to veer off from the track you wanted it to take. But honestly, your reasoning is very JW-ish in places.
I think it was Cofty who astutely observed, "Those who study the Bible the closest usually end up doubting it. Absolutely true. That is the very opposite of 'laziness'.
I started this thread with a specific cross reference about an anomaly in the nwt hoping to have some theological discussion about things like authors intent and general dishonestly from the watchtower and tract society. When you are a jw it is really quite shocking how they don't teach or avoid the connections between the old and new testament.
What I got in return was mockery, ridicule , sweeping generalizations about the bible ( its all bullshit man ). I have to say it really quite disappointing, especially for those who left for theological reasons.
Steel You gonna have to be thick-skinned to hang around here unfortunately -
There is a strong tendency on the site to "attack" anyone who does espouse things in a manner you have. Then again there are some truly useful contributors too -
I enjoy the Bohemian nature of this site and the fact that many are so on top of certain things Borg related ...including getting first dibs on stuff coming out of Borgland.
You can also visit Beroean Pickets site - you wont get any rude responses there
The very types of responses you accuse others of, Steel, you engage in yourself.
While I made no personal comments about you i expressed some plain statements about how multiple interpretations of Scripture exist, with the many different views each being able to adduce Scripture to bolster their claims of having the "truth".
I do not recall anyone writing about the Bible, "It's all bullshit", as you claim. What was said was more thoughtful even if hard to read for those who believe in the Bible's inerrancy.
And you have conveniently skipped over comments made that you sound very JW-ish in your approach to this topic. Like them, you immediately resort to exaggeration and ad hominem arguments to bolster your view.
If if you want total agreement with your views, be like JWs, start your own forum and you will then have no difficulties censoring any who dare disagree with you.
And what exactly is your opinion about this specific cross reference between John and psalms?