A Jehovas Witness Woman Dies - refused blood...

I think, if someone enters into the discussion with the aim to find the truth, he/she should be prepared that at least a part of the truth may come from someone other than himself.
If someone thinks that he/she's right from the beginning, than he/she should insist with reasonable discussion as long as the opposite discussant stays reasonable.

 

Nice spelling by the way. The last thing I am aware of the Watchtower Society made a mistake was in 1975. Yes, they made some before then but not many. The intentions were always good but the information at hand is not as clear as it is today. I have not seen any mistakes since 1975. Others might have different views than me but then again, we all have to render an account with God don't we?

What would you like me to do? Speak out against the Watchtower? I would have to have proof of the thing I am speaking out against wouldn't I? The things you, tbarr60 and npt have put forward are not things proven at all. All they are is opinions, views and hearsay.

Being a Witness is a lifestyle. We live and breathe it. You asking me to let go of that is the same as asking me to let go of my life. I can't see myself doing that.

 

Cheapseo,

I only now note you are indicating I, "npt," have "put forward things not proven at all."

I'm sorry, but I must ask: what on earth are you talking about? I'll say it plainly. I am not attacking you or your organization. In fact, quite the opposite, when I felt your faith was being unduly and unfairly attacked.

Here, I have merely sought discussion, as I was genuinely curious about what appears to me to be something inconsistent in the Bible, based on Paul's own words. As such, it wasn't directed to you as to any person of Christian faith.

In response, first, you once mentioned (not "repeatedly," as you earlier said, but once) you didn't think online was the best place to discuss these things, then you proceeded to discuss those things at length; I was perfectly happy to move on ("agree to disagree"), but you responded to something I wrote to Protein's commentary, so I thought you wished to continue the discussion. Now you are indicating I am putting forward something in the way of an accusative volley, or something? Or, that I am merely stating some kind of a personal opinion, when in fact, I have directly pointed out your scripture as a point of departure for discussion???

Consider me utterly confused. If I have just been an asshole, resorting to b.s. tactics in debate, then, by all means - fire away. But if I am simply and honorably dealing with the discussion at hand, which I believe I am, I do not understand your conclusions here at all. If you perceive my questions as a threat, I'm sorry for that - it wasn't my intent at all. I am an odd atheist - a former person of faith, I was nose deep in the Bible from the time I was 12 or so, and still find Christ's advent a deeply interesting subject for discussion. And this is all my contributions here have come from.

 

Sorry mate. At the time I wrote this I was under pressure frmo different things and I mistakenly put you in the same basket as tbarr60 and proteindude. Please forgive me. I did not intend to accuse you of these things. I understand your point of view and it is a good thing that you question all sorts of things in regards to Bible teachings. That's the type of thinking that got me where I am now.

I have been constantly under attack from tbarr60 and some others in recent times and to be honest, I just was fed up with it earlier today. You were caught in the crossfire and I only blame myself for you being there in the first place.

I can only hope that we can be peaceable in all things.

 

Just to make sure you don't misunderstand me: I admire the JWs and the Mormons for their dedication. If I could not have Christians as neighbours the JWs and the Mormons would be my preferrence. I think you both are misguided and yet I admire your allegiance to your organisations and to doing "God's will".

Now, the more I find out about JWs, the more it becomes clearer to me that you do not follow the Bible in which you believe, but you follow the teachings of the Watchtower. No matter how great your intentions as a JW are and no matter how moral and sincere and dedicated you are to your cause, you can also be sincerely wrong.

You cannot separate the Watchtower and your beliefs which says that one cannot exist without the other. Therefore, an organisation that puts itself in the place of God, is NOT an organisation to be trusted. That is why I find so bizarre your claim of independent thinking AND YET, the Watchtower cannot be faulted at all. So without any sarcasm I must say that Watchtowerites is a more appropriate name since you do the Watchtower will NOT God's will.

 

That's where we disagree. I firmly believe I am doing God's will. I can see it very clearly in the Bible what God's will is. As far as I have learned God's will has not changed since the beginning of mankind. You can label the Watchtower Society as much as you like and label us as well. It will not change things or change my views one iota. God's will, will be done no matter what we think his will is.

You speak like you are an authority on God's will. So tell me, what do you believe God's will is?

 

I believe I am just a human being in need of God's mercy. I don't believe I'm infallible and I also don't believe anyone else (this includes any organisation) is also infallible.

I believe in searching the Scriptures for myself and I don't accept that EVERYTHING my organisation teaches is 100% accurate. That is why my allegiance is to Jehovah and his son Jesus Christ and not to anyone else. My love for my Lord is above my love for any organisation and will not accept that any organisation is infallible.

 

That's a fair comment and I totally respect that from you.

 

I understand, Col, no worries. Peace.