Who is the true church?

[michel]

Yes, I always thought it was amusing that a JW will talk about how they are the only one who uses God's personal name, but it's just a name they made up and is really no more valid than LORD is.

I am sorry, Aqualung; I find that attitude a trifle condescending; If a JW cares to believe that his/her Faith is the only one who knows the personal Name of God, I don't really understand why you should feel the need to ridicule them..............

Perhaps you might like to think about the morality of 'Live and let live'

 

[Snowbear]

... there are people on this forum who don't like to see inaccurate information posted about their beliefs.

That could be said of most of us. It could also be said of most of us that we don't like being told our interpretation of scripture is "not correct" because it is not in line with your church's official interpretation. A simple statement like, "I disagree.... this is what I believe" sits a lot better than, "Your interpretation is not correct."

 

[Aqualung]

That could be said of most of us. It could also be said of most of us that we don't like being told our interpretation of scripture is "not correct" because it is not in line with your church's official interpretation. A simple statement like, "I disagree.... this is what I believe" sits a lot better than, "Your interpretation is not correct."

I disagree.... this is what I beleive. If you're in a debate, it's perfectly okay to say, "That's not right. this is the real way." What it's not okay to say is, "You're not explaining your beleifs correctly. Let me tell you what you beleive."

Debates are telling people that they are wrong, and telling them what is right. Disscussions are sitting down and telling each other your beleifs. But in neither area is there room for somebody to describe my beleifs to myself.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The more appropriate question may be: "Who is the true Jesus?" The true church will be the followers of the true Jesus.

 

[michel]

********************************MOD POST******************************​

​

Actually, what you are debating here is a major issue, and an important one. What I think this comes down to (in the end) is that there is nothing wrong with criticizing someone else's beliefs - as long as it is done in a way as to make it clear that you are not personally attaking that person himself.​

​

One possible example could be shown by the following:-​

​

"You are illogical and naive." --- PERSONAL ATTACK

"Your argument is illogical and naive." --- ACCEPTABLE​

​

Please realize that this is in no way a final 'Ruling', but perhaps a guide for you guys to work by. If you can try to debate within these parameters, there should hopefully, be no bruised feelings
​

********************************MOD POST******************************
​

 

[michel]

The more appropriate question may be: "Who is the true Jesus?" The true church will be the followers of the true Jesus.

Good point; but surely everyone is going to claim that their 'Jesus' is the 'right' one; whilst that may be a guide, I cannot see it making the debate any less difficult.

 

[Aqualung]

Exactly! Which is what I am saying.

 

[Katzpur]

Well said. He or she does seem to have some definite beliefs based on very little.

Can I ask you a different question? Where does the name Mormon come from. It does not seem to be related to your long official name.

The name Mormon comes from our belief in The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. Mormon was an ancient American prophet who was the major compiler of the record Joseph Smith translated into The Book of Mormon. We don't mind being called "Mormons," but there is, technically speaking, no such thing as the "Mormon Church." Thank goodness we don't have to struggle with saying "the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Tabernacle Choir"!

 

[Aqualung]

I am sorry, Aqualung; I find that attitude a trifle condescending; If a JW cares to believe that his/her Faith is the only one who knows the personal Name of God, I don't really understand why you should feel the need to ridicule them..............

Perhaps you might like to think about the morality of 'Live and let live'

I'm letting them live. I'm just pointing out what I feel is something questionable about their faith. And I'm not ridiculing anybody. I'm just pointing a weirdness.

 

[Aqualung]

i can see you have been listening to critics, rather than finding out why we use Jehovah , but that is your choice of coarse,

I know why you use Jehovah. I have listened to both the critics and the authorities, as my family and I attended a JW church for a while. We ended up with a lot of JW literature, which I have read.

 

[Katzpur]

That could be said of most of us. It could also be said of most of us that we don't like being told our interpretation of scripture is "not correct" because it is not in line with your church's official interpretation. A simple statement like, "I disagree.... this is what I believe" sits a lot better than, "Your interpretation is not correct."

Stew,

Since you quoted me, I couldn't help but wonder if you see me as guilty of doing this. If I have, I'm sorry. I generally try to go out of my way to state that I am expressing my opinion and nothing more.

Kathryn

 

[Katzpur]

The more appropriate question may be: "Who is the true Jesus?" The true church will be the followers of the true Jesus.

Huh? Since when was there more than one Jesus? I assume you're speaking of Jesus Christ, Son of God, who was born in Bethlehem of the Virgin Mary. If you are, I follow Him. So do a lot of Roman Catholics, Orthodox Christians and Protestants. Do some of us follow the "false" Jesus?

 

[Snowbear]

Stew,

Since you quoted me, I couldn't help but wonder if you see me as guilty of doing this. If I have, I'm sorry. I generally try to go out of my way to state that I am expressing my opinion and nothing more.

Kathryn

Well... since once again my "complaint" was dismissed as invalid (though he's not a mod, it's obvious in most threads that Aqualung and you agree on most everything), it really doesn't matter what I think, does it.

I don't mind discussion at all, but take offense to being told what I believe in my heart is wrong. So for my own piece of mind, i should probably put more effort into avoiding the "debate" forums where it's allowed to tell *some* folks that their spiritual beliefs are full of crap.

 

[Katzpur]

Well... since once again my "complaint" was dismissed as invalid (though he's not a mod, it's obvious in most threads that Aqualung and you agree on most everything), it really doesn't matter what I think, does it.

I don't mind discussion at all, but take offense to being told what I believe in my heart is wrong. So for my own piece of mind, i should probably put more effort into avoiding the "debate" forums where it's allowed to tell *some* folks that their spiritual beliefs are full of crap.

You know, ever since you came on this forum, you've seemed to have something against me. I would seriously like to know what it is. If I didn't care what you think, I wouldn't ask. Would you please just tell me what I have done to offend you, since I honestly haven't been able to figure it out for myself.

 

[Aqualung]

Well... since once again my "complaint" was dismissed as invalid (though he's not a mod, it's obvious in most threads that Aqualung and you agree on most everything), it really doesn't matter what I think, does it.

I don't mind discussion at all, but take offense to being told what I believe in my heart is wrong. So for my own piece of mind, i should probably put more effort into avoiding the "debate" forums where it's allowed to tell *some* folks that their spiritual beliefs are full of crap.

Stewpid Loser. I'm sorry. I wasn't trying to take Katzpur's side, and I didn't mean to attack you. I've just seen a lot of people lately on this forum getting mad because somebody actually tried to debate them. I told you to off without even reading what you were offended by, and just assumed you to be one of the people who get into debates and then get mad when people debate. For that, I am sorry.

 

[Snowbear]

You know, ever since you came on this forum, you've seemed to have something against me. I would seriously like to know what it is. If I didn't care what you think, I wouldn't ask. Would you please just tell me what I have done to offend you, since I honestly haven't been able to figure it out for myself.

Not you personally. But it does seem you are involved in the few threads I actually end up participating in. As I expressed before (which was, of course, dismissed by the mods and admins), I think it stinks that it's OK to criticize and put down the beliefs of Christians, but if someone does the same to others, they are reprimanded or banned or as in my case, accused of a personal vendetta. When I was told to point out specific examples via the post report button, my complaint was dismissed by admins as an unfounded/invalid complaint.

Just because I disagree with you or your church's interpretation of scripture doesn't mean I have anything against you personally. My only real criticism of you is the thread where you reposted, apparently with admin permission, a banned members challenge of your religion in a thread that ended up serving only to mock and ridicule that former member when he could no longer defend himself. I complained to another mod about that as well, but obviously the offensive (to me) thread is still there. The fact that my disagreement with much of your and your church's interpretation of scripture is now being considered personal only reinforces my original "allegations..." which were that I completely understand what a much respected former member (NetDoc) was complaining of when he unfortunately pulled the plug.

 

[Snowbear]

Stewpid Loser. I'm sorry. I wasn't trying to take Katzpur's side, and I didn't mean to attack you. I've just seen a lot of people lately on this forum getting mad because somebody actually tried to debate them. I told you to off without even reading what you were offended by, and just assumed you to be one of the people who get into debates and then get mad when people debate. For that, I am sorry.

Apology accepted. I actually don't get offended at all and sometimes can even enjoy a good debate. But I guess my idea of debate and the debate that's recognized here are not the same.

Rather than seeing debate as a forum for saying "you're wrong and here's why" I always saw it as more like "Here's why I'm right" from one side with a counter "Here's why I'm right" from the other side. As I said above, since obviously I'm wrong about this, it's probably better if I just be more diligent in staying out of the debate forum.

p.s. the mods may want to consider splitting this debate discussion/debate to it's own thread, since it's way off topic of the original topic

 

[Aqualung]

Apology accepted. I actually don't get offended at all and sometimes can even enjoy a good debate. But I guess my idea of debate and the debate that's recognized here are not the same.

Rather than seeing debate as a forum for saying "you're wrong and here's why" I always saw it as more like "Here's why I'm right" from one side with a counter "Here's why I'm right" from the other side. As I said above, since obviously I'm wrong about this, it's probably better if I just be more diligent in staying out of the debate forum.

p.s. the mods may want to consider splitting this debate discussion/debate to it's own thread, since it's way off topic of the original topic

Okay, I see where you're coming from. I'll definitely try to use that sort of language/phrasing in future debates with you.

 

[Katzpur]

*** MOD POST ***

Aqua and Stew,

This discussion between the three of us is getting out of hand. If we continue it at all, it needs to be via PMs. I am as much at fault as either of you, but we're all going to be in the doghouse if we keep this up.

Let's get back to the topic.

 

[Merlin]

i can see you have been listening to critics, rather than finding out why we use Jehovah , but that is your choice of coarse,

Tell us please?