Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I wasn't asking about your representation of the JW position. I was asking about your representation of the JW organization. Do you think you've represented the JW organization well? In other words, do you think you've done more harm or good to the reputation of the JW organization?

BTW, I'm not at all concerned with my "reputation" with those kids tha ...[text shortened]... m seem mature - other than to pre-teens and other teens, it makes them seem immature.

whatever, perhaps someone, somewhere cares.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
whatever, perhaps someone, somewhere cares.

One would think that you would care whether you've done more harm or good to the reputation of an organization that you represent.

Do you think that your elders care?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The fact is, if you profess to follow the Bible in its entirety, you should advocate the
execution of homosexual people - Rank Outsider

nope, this is an oversimplification and a misunderstanding. It is true that the act of
homosexuality was a capital crime in the nation of Israel under the mandate of the
Mosaic law, however, the law is appl ...[text shortened]... apologise for the length of this text but its not so simple to explain it in any other
terms.

Well then, the stance is clear. Christians have the right to cherry pick the bible for the passages they wish to adhere to. It's all just suggestions then.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Well then, the stance is clear. Christians have the right to cherry pick the bible for the passages they wish to adhere to. It's all just suggestions then.

clearly you have understood virtually nothing about the passages and their explanation,
is it any wonder you have a skewered perspective?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
clearly you have understood virtually nothing about the passages and their explanation,
is it any wonder you have a skewered perspective?

So you DON'T pick and choose, as christians, which verses of the bible to follow?

If that is the case, why do you need the old testament as part of your bible? Why don't you just chuck the old test. out and just go with the new?

Originally posted by sonhouse
So you DON'T pick and choose, as christians, which verses of the bible to follow?

If that is the case, why do you need the old testament as part of your bible? Why don't you just chuck the old test. out and just go with the new?

because it contains principles that are still applicable, as explained, in the text, for
example, you must not steal, you must not commit adultery are all principles that
are still binding upon Christians although the Law which incorporated them has been
annulled, due to a superior Law, the Law of the Christ.

That is correct, ALL scripture is inspired of God and beneficial! 2 Tim 3:16,17

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
because it contains principles that are still applicable, as explained, in the text, for
example, you must not steal, you must not commit adultery are all principles that
are still binding upon Christians although the Law which incorporated them has been
annulled, due to a superior Law, the Law of the Christ.

That is correct, ALL scripture is inspired of God and beneficial! 2 Tim 3:16,17

So you reject the part of the OT that says men are worth 50 shekels but women are only worth 35 shekels? Or the directive saying gays should be put to death?

Originally posted by sonhouse
So you reject the part of the OT that says men are worth 50 shekels but women are only worth 35 shekels? Or the directive saying gays should be put to death?

no i don't reject it, its part of the mosaic law, part of the Biblical canon, now annulled in
practice, but binding in principle, as i have explained. What is it about ALL scripture
being inspired that you don't understand.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no i don't reject it, its part of the mosaic law, part of the Biblical canon, now annulled in
practice, but binding in principle, as i have explained. What is it about ALL scripture
being inspired that you don't understand.

So it still sounds like cherry picking to me🙂

Originally posted by sonhouse
So you reject the part of the OT that says men are worth 50 shekels but women are only worth 35 shekels? Or the directive saying gays should be put to death?

We don't use shekels and don't ask Jehovah's Witnesses about what Christians cherry pick.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So it still sounds like cherry picking to me🙂

not really, it the difference between a law and a principle 🙂

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
not really, it the difference between a law and a principle 🙂

Difference between a law and an option....

Originally posted by RJHinds
We don't use shekels and don't ask Jehovah's Witnesses about what Christians cherry pick.

If you did use shekels you would still suppress women. For instance, would you let a woman preach to you?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Difference between a law and an option....

no a principle, nice try, but no cigar.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no a principle, nice try, but no cigar.

But for sure there are people who totally reject the whole NT thing. If I am not wrong they call them Jews🙂

Why don't THEY execute gays for instance, and treat women like they are only worth 7/10ths of a man?