27 May 12
3 edits
Originally posted by Rank outsiderHe is uninterested in evidence, his currency is opinion, usually his own, that is why he never provides so much as a semblence for his claims. He is not interested in what Jehovahs Witnesses have actually printed in our literature with regard to any claims of inspiration or infallability. He is more intetested in opinion as is evidenced by his insistence on focusing upon it. I personally read his texts as I would a tabliod newspaper knowing that it is sensationalistic and deviod of substance.
Err thanks (I think).
However, on the 'suckered' point I am just baffled. If you are saying that Robbie or galveston75 lied to me, and I accepted them at face value until shown otherwise, well OK, it's just not a term I would use to describe this even if what you say is correct. I would potentially be equally 'suckered' if I accepted all that is s t of the Bible. So there was no desire or intention to take the sting out of this.
27 May 12
Originally posted by FMFSorry - but I don't know where I told you that Robbie or galveston75 had assured me Awake was not divinely inspired. I avoided discussion of this aspect as I was not clear I knew precisely what divinely inspired meant.
galveston75 claims, quite explicitly, back in April, that JW literature [where these prophecies/interpretations are published] is divinely inspired.
robbie claims that JW literature is not divinely inspired.
I point out to robbie that galveston75 has claimed that JW literature is divinely inspired.
robbie says that if galveston75 has claimed that JW ...[text shortened]... mbination of deflections and janus words that they so often deploy in these situations. 😀
My memory is not great, but I really can't remember saying this.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 121534
27 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat an interesting point you make...
(2 Corinthians 2:17) . . .for we are not peddlers of the word of God as many men are, but as out of sincerity, . . .
do your self certified opinions know no bounds? do us and yourself a favour and make
some reference to what our 'peddling', actually accomplishes and of the millions of
persons who have been helped by our 'peddling'.
Yes JW's do "peddle" their message because in order to obtain the 'goods', one must join your organisation. There is a 'price' to pay.
The true gospel is given completely freely, no-one has to join anything or become anything except being the property of Christ.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 121534
27 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou want a list of names??
really, millions of persons are helping others transcend national and religious
boundaries, who are these millions...
Dave, Dee, Dosy, Mick and Tich...
You are totally lost in the delusion that your organisation sells you; that you (JWs) are the only ones doing god's work.
27 May 12
Originally posted by divegeesterI have the actual list. I cant list all here ..
You want a list of names??
Dave, Dee, Dosy, Mick and Tich...
You are totally lost in the delusion that your organisation sells you; that you (JWs) are the only ones doing god's work.
1. Clinton Poulsen
2. Neil Agustin
3. Nita Kemble
4. Julio Ritzman
5. Javier Jantzen
6. Harriett Stonecipher
7. Ted Canto
8. Lance Burfield
9. Jessie Vanhook
10. Jamie Prigge
11. Nita Muncie
12. Jamie Charlebois
13. Jami Cartee
14. Edwina Philhower
15. Jami Kitchell
16. Noemi Fragale
17. Annabelle Kale
18. Darren Sama
19. Edwina Grauberger
20. Cody Monsivais
21. Mathew Soja
22. Kurt Moench
23. Jami Tallant
24. Lonnie La
25. Althea Scioneaux
26. Clinton Lobato
27. Malinda Paolucci
28. Serena Heinze
29. Mends
30. Lilia Grindle
27 May 12
1. Mathew Vanderveen
2. Lance Chiou
3. Beesley
4. Roxie Slovinsky
5. Lonnie Goulart
6. Lance Abadie
7. Fernando Stedman
8. Lakisha Beegle
9. Alana Mabee
10. Julio Carreras
11. Chandra Monsen
12. Althea Pattillo
13. Lonnie Nellis
14. Roslyn Grana
15. Lonnie Caufield
16. Lonnie Maddocks
17. Saundra Westhoff
18. Kathrine Nickle
19. Liza Seawright
20. Lonnie Heberling
21. Fernando Huntsberry
22. Melisa Serino
23. Allie Vancil
24. Jessie Lute
25. Mathew Marinaro
26. Lance Ghoston
27. Clare Bremner
28. Cody Lindauer
29. Jessie Amon
30. Tyrone Krech
27 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by Rank outsiderWhat "distinction" is it you're going to make this time? Between "infallible" and "divinely inspired"? How so? At one point you said "Should this not be 'Have there been some mistakes in the Awake publication'? And did not Robbie accept this was the case to me on page 5? And galveston75 appeared to concur by accepting that no man or organisation was infallible." Meanwhile, as they were assuring you that they were not infallible out of one side of the mouth, galvestion75 was clearly standing by earlier claims he'd made that the publications were divinely inspired, comparing their writing to the writing of the ten commandments even, and robbie was quietly endorsing him out of the other side of his mouth. They're having it both ways, and you - as is your right, I suppose - are only hearing one side of it. 😀
Sorry - but I don't know where I told you that Robbie or galveston75 had assured me Awake was not divinely inspired..
28 May 12
Originally posted by FMFYour welcome to your opinion. But the Bible clearly said he ( God) would have a people for his name. His name is Jehovah and no one uses that name and proclaims it earthwide in over 230 lands as we do.
No.
I think there is no organisation that can claim it is "being used by God".
28 May 12
Originally posted by galveston75As you have reportedly admitted, your organisation's interpretation of the bible has been shown to be flawed time and time again. Are you now saying you've definitely got your interpretation of the bible right when you tell us it's just your organisation that is "being used by God"?
Your welcome to your opinion. But the Bible clearly said he ( God) would have a people for his name. His name is Jehovah and no one uses that name and proclaims it earthwide in over 230 lands as we do.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 121534
28 May 12
Originally posted by galveston75Has it ever crossed your mind that this may in fact be one of the "falibilities" you seem insistent on us accepting?
Your welcome to your opinion. But the Bible clearly said he ( God) would have a people for his name. His name is Jehovah and no one uses that name and proclaims it earthwide in over 230 lands as we do.
Or perhaps "JW falibility" only goes as far as interpretation of prophecy and not as far as self actualisation as the "sole holders of God's truth on Earth"?
28 May 12
Originally posted by galveston75Since you guys now admit the Watchtower have been wrong on their interpretation of Biblical prophecies, could they also be wrong on their interpretation about "blood transfusions" and the "deity of Christ"?
Your welcome to your opinion. But the Bible clearly said he ( God) would have a people for his name. His name is Jehovah and no one uses that name and proclaims it earthwide in over 230 lands as we do.
28 May 12
Originally posted by divegeesterIf you truely understood the Bible and what is says about God and the way he works with humans and the issues at hand...you would not be asking this type of question.
Has it ever crossed your mind that this may in fact be one of the "falibilities" you seem insistent on us accepting?
Or perhaps "JW falibility" only goes as far as interpretation of prophecy and not as far as self actualisation as the "sole holders of God's truth on Earth"?