Truth .. JW Style

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
first of all, he has made a reference to 'Christ's vineyard', and being a student of scripture i immediately wondered what this could mean, in that context? was it referring to his pastoral work within the church? exclusively among Catholics? or others too? If indeed he was a Christian and carrying on Christ's work, why was i not a recipient of i ...[text shortened]... ascertain what it means?

The Pope digs us, its you who cannot bring yourself to say it.

first of all, he has made a reference to 'Christ's vineyard', and being a student of scripture i immediately wondered what this could mean, in that context? was it referring to his pastoral work within the church? exclusively among Catholics? or others too? If indeed he was a Christian and carrying on Christ's work, why was i not a recipient of it? being a poor sinner? surely i need him more than the already faithful? You see if one is going to make statements with reference to scripture is it not obligatory that we try to ascertain what it means?

I don't think you can reasonably expect the Pope to visit each non-Catholic individually. I guess the Pope does what he sees as Christ's work firstly by administering, offering Mass and hearing confessions; secondly in his role as Pope, as universal pastor; and thirdly in his role as an academic, teaching and arguing his faith.

The Pope digs us, its you who cannot bring yourself to say it.

It's unlikely. All you have are the words of an elderly woman. In court, it would be dismissed as hearsay.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ok Kelly, you believe what you want, the principle is clear enough to me, indeed, the Bible does not mention smoking tobacco but i am reasonable enough to know the principle is there, for not only does the scripture contain a prohibition to abstain from blood, whether through diet or any other means, it attaches a healthy countenance with abstention ...[text shortened]... see the principles or not. To me in my own mind, the matter is quite clear, abstain from blood!

Fine with me, you believe it so it is what it is.
Kelly

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]That would make religions like the Catholics very mad and would put him to death again for his exposing not only the Catholics but all other false religions.

You are just being provocative. I know many Catholics who spend hours before the tabernacle simply out of their desire for Jesus and faith that he is truly present there. I don't think you know about Catholicism or how authentic their religious faith is.[/b]

No I'm being factual. And what does the many hours in front of the tabernacle accomplish?

Originally posted by KellyJay
Fine with me, you believe it so it is what it is.
Kelly

reading between the lines Kelly i hope you discerned that what i am really saying is, i cannot be bothered arguing any more with persons who cannot see beyond the literal, or rather, who refuse to see beyond the literal. It takes reasoning and discernment to think about a principle and how it applies to various circumstances and the admonition is clear, abstain from blood.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i contort nothing! the fact remains that intravenously injecting anything is equally if not more harmful than eating it, try it with anything, if you live you will see that i am correct. Your approach while being novel oh illustrious Agers of a thousand Agers fails on the premise that my blood is not leaving the system it was designed for and passin ...[text shortened]... ant women and a baby scenario, for it is still a part of her own body, indeed, until it is born.

When you extrapolate from "abstain from blood" that it's scope includes blood transfusions, then as there is no mention or justification of this point in terms of the risks associated with the procedure (note that people who die due to critical loss of blood fail to be healthy) there is no reason why we cannot extrapolate further and extend the scope of this statement to include ones own blood. As far as I can discern, the specific sources of said blood is not mentioned such to rule out my offering and so my contention stands.

Furthermore, if you were to say that we would surely die in this setting, this would be a red herring since not only is it true that people die anyway without transfusions, it is also true that you claim (in so many words) that "abstain from blood" is not a pick and choose premise. (so if this particular argument is true, then *any* consequence good or bad is moot).

Originally posted by Agerg
When you extrapolate from "abstain from blood" that it's scope includes blood transfusions, then as there is no mention or justification of this point in terms of the risks associated with the procedure (note that people who die due to critical loss of blood fail to be healthy) there is no reason why we cannot extrapolate further and extend the scope of this s ...[text shortened]... ise. (so if this particular argument is true, then *any* consequence good or bad is moot).

Agers Agers, after all we have been through you turn Judas on me, how can that be? first of all my dear sir, there is a clear admonishment that abstaining is healthy, here is the verse again,

(Acts 15:28-29) . . .For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things,  to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”

you see the little qualifying statement near the end? good health to you! if you abstain from blood.

secondly as i have already stated, there are other procedures for critical loss of blood, indeed, if you search the thread you may find some of them, therefore your objections are unwarranted and without foundation, good health to you!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
our friend think of one is an advocate of Christ's teaching only, he refuses to recognise the validity of other scripture which at times leaves him with rather strange beliefs for he cannot put the constituent parts together so as to form a whole. What is evading him at present is that there is a difference between not understanding the import of a ...[text shortened]... larity on the teachers part and not wanting to understand on the part of the recipients.

What is evading [ThinkOfOne] at present is that there is a difference between not understanding the import of a teaching due to lack of clarity on the teachers part and not wanting to understand on the part of the recipients.

Your accusation is a blatant lie, but not at all out of character for you.

You had made the following assertion:

If someone is misunderstanding what you are saying, it is you that is at fault for being unable to express yourself in a manner that is clear and readily understood by the recipient, it is a sign of a very poor teacher, indeed.

I argued against this ridiculously false statement as follows:

This isn't necessarily true. Sometimes individuals do not comprehend what is being said for any number of reasons which have little to do with how well the "teacher" expressed himself. For example: the reader draws illogical conclusions, the reader doesn't take the time to understand what was written, the reader is blinded by preconceived notions, etc. Seems that more than a few had difficulty understanding Jesus including his disciples. Do you consider Him a "very poor teacher, indeed"?

Clearly I was arguing against the very thing that you are accusing me of. I even gave the example of those who did not understand Jesus. In fact, if anyone does not understand "that there is a difference between not understanding the import of a teaching due to lack of clarity on the teachers part and not wanting to understand on the part of the recipients" it is you.

Do you really believe you represent the JWs well when you resort to lying? When you resort to such dishonest tactics?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]What is evading [ThinkOfOne] at present is that there is a difference between not understanding the import of a teaching due to lack of clarity on the teachers part and not wanting to understand on the part of the recipients.

Your accusation is a blatant lie, but not at all out of character for you.

You had made the following assertion:
[qu resent the JWs well when you resort to lying? When you resort to such dishonest tactics?[/b]

actually it was not entirely clear what you were saying, perhaps if you expressed yourself more clarity then you would not need to resort to this tedious and fruitless debate and as I pointed out, in the case of Christ he took time to help the disciples understand when they could not grasp the import of his illustrations, clearly your qualifying statement (did not want to, were opposed to, had their own criteria to establish) holds no truth in the case of the disciples, for they wanted to learn, did they not?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
actually it was not entirely clear what you were saying, perhaps if you expressed yourself more clearly then you would not need to resort to this tedious and fruitless debate.

You really have the heart of a liar RC. If you were at all honest, you would admit your error and apologize instead of once again resorting to dishonest tactics.

Why does your repeated dishonesty say about you?

John 8
44“You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

You speak from your "own nature".

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
You really have the heart of a liar RC. If you were at all honest, you would admit your error and apologize instead of once again resorting to dishonest tactics.

Why does your repeated dishonesty say about you?

John 8
44“You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, ...[text shortened]... nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

You speak from your "own nature".

thanks, as a reader of hearts , do you also do minds and motives? what about palms and tarot cards? what am i thinking now? can i book you for a session, id love to know what motivates other people - thanks in advance, your fan - robbie.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
thanks, as a reader of hearts , do you also do minds and motives? what about palms and tarot cards? what am i thinking now? can i book you for a session, id love to know what motivates other people - thanks in advance, your fan - robbie.

Your actions have shown you to be a liar and dishonest. Your continued juvenile antics not only do nothing to cover this up, but are dishonest in and of themselves.

Luke 6
45“The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Your actions have shown you to be a liar and dishonest. Your continued juvenile antics not only do nothing to cover this up, but are dishonest in and of themselves.

Luke 6
45“The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.

thank you, i am big fan you know,

(Psalm 141:5) . . .Should the righteous one strike me, it would be a loving-kindness; And should he reprove me, it would be oil upon the head, Which my head would not want to refuse.. . .

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
thank you, i am big fan you know,

(Psalm 141:5) . . .Should the righteous one strike me, it would be a loving-kindness; And should he reprove me, it would be oil upon the head, Which my head would not want to refuse.. . .

Once again, "You really have the heart of a liar RC. If you were at all honest, you would admit your error and apologize instead of once again resorting to dishonest tactics."

That you continue speaks volumes about your total lack of character.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Once again, "You really have the heart of a liar RC. If you were at all honest, you would admit your error and apologize instead of once again resorting to dishonest tactics."

That you continue speaks volumes about your total lack of character.

Big fan you know,

(Proverbs 26:20-22) . . .Where there is no wood the fire goes out, and where there is no slanderer contention grows still.  As charcoal for the embers and wood for the fire, so is a contentious man for causing a quarrel to glow.  The words of a slanderer are like things to be swallowed greedily, which do go down into the innermost parts of the belly. . .

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Big fan you know,

(Proverbs 26:20-22) . . .Where there is no wood the fire goes out, and where there is no slanderer contention grows still.  As charcoal for the embers and wood for the fire, so is a contentious man for causing a quarrel to glow.  The words of a slanderer are like things to be swallowed greedily, which do go down into the innermost parts of the belly. . .

Are you trying to claim that you are being slandered?

If so it's yet another dishonest tactic by you.

You are what are. You are a liar as I clearly showed earlier in the thread.

Do you really think that you change this fact through your continued use of dishonest tactics?

If you ever wonder why so many dislike JWs and/or Christians it is because they encounter people like you.