Originally posted by robbie carrobieYOU are the one who has turned this thread from its original purpose. YOU are the one who refused to answer questions put forth in this thread. YOU are the one who has hijacked this thread towards attacking Witness Lee and others, instead of defending Charles Russell, which apparently you cannot do.
you know what, you come across real slippery, you seem unable to simply answer a question with honesty and simplicity. You were asked what he did for a living. Why couldn't you just say he was a taxi driver, or he had a shop that sold books. I take it from your text he fleeced his flock. Thank you that's all I wanted to know. Once again the apostl ...[text shortened]... o that he would not be a burden to anyone doing hard work with his hands, as the scriptures say.
I will leave it to others to ascertain who the slippery one is.
Originally posted by SuzianneIn fairness to Robbie, I gave permission for him turn the tables on examining a teacher I also revere.
YOU are the one who has turned this thread from its original purpose. YOU are the one who refused to answer questions put forth in this thread. YOU are the one who has hijacked this thread towards attacking Witness Lee and others, instead of defending Charles Russell, which apparently you cannot do.
I will leave it to others to ascertain who the slippery one is.
I said "Fair is fair" when a couple of posters brought up the subject of Witness Lee.
Originally posted by sonshipI just hope that when Robbie has blown himself out against Witness Lee, you steer him back to the original purpose of this thread.
In fairness to Robbie, I gave permission for him turn the tables on examining a teacher I also revere.
I said "Fair is fair" when a couple of posters brought up the subject of Witness Lee.
It may be that "Fair is fair", but that shouldn't allow Robbie to skate away without answering your questions.
1 edit
Originally posted by Suzianne1.) I no longer expect an answer from him on that question.
I just hope that when Robbie has blown himself out against Witness Lee, you steer him back to the original purpose of this thread.
It may be that "Fair is fair", but that shouldn't allow Robbie to skate away without answering your questions.
I don't think about it anymore. He's not going to get personal or subjective about knowing God.
Maybe he just cannot.
2.) I am ready for my part to close this thread (yet that is not really my perogative).
I concluded with three points:
a.) I am still studying early beginnings of the JWs.
b.) I never met any JWs that talk about Freemasonary things.
c.) The denial of the physical resurrection of Christ, I think, is reminiscient of Docetism which was an subset of Gnosticism.
And I think the Masons (which are not that easy to find out about) had some gnosticism in their secretive society.
Any further wrangling about Witness Lee, as far as I am concerned, can take place on a new thread just for that if they want.
Originally posted by RJHindsand you've been missed ever since!
I studied with the JWs for a little while and went to their Kingdom Hall and even though i do not consider myself an expert on their cult, I learned enough about them to know they are far from orthodox Christianity. I decided it was best for me to depart quietly and without incident.
Originally posted by sonshipIf you can get a copy of Proclaimers of Gods Kingdom it is a detailed history of all the issues that we faced, both internally and externally. There are also a video series as well.
1.) I no longer expect an answer from him on that question.
I don't think about it anymore. He's not going to get personal or subjective about knowing God.
Maybe he just cannot.
2.) I am ready for my part to close this thread (yet that is not really my perogative).
I concluded with three points:
a.) I am still studying ear ...[text shortened]... itness Lee, as far as I am concerned, can take place on a new thread just for that if they want.