Ask one of Jehovah's Witnesses

[Won2blv]

Well I can tell you until I am blue in the face that you're wrong about certain assessments but you're not going to be rational in your replies. If by definition witnesses are polytheist, that doesn't make a difference to me. The scriptures clearly state that God created Jesus. And the two created everything else 1 Corinthians 1:15,16. Jehovah is god almighty and Jesus is his only begotten son. The absolute closest thing that we would ever have to a resemblance of God. 

Nor does it make a difference to me.  You certainly don't have to spend anytime convincing me one way or the other, and it's pointless to continue saying "you're wrong" and "you're being illogical" - because A: I'm not, and B..you would have to show that, not claim it - and you simply can't.  1+1=2, and that's that, I'm afraid.  I find it interesting not because I think there's anything wrong with polytheistic underpinnings or insinuations, and not because I care to show you or prove to you that there is only one god (I don't believe that..you see), only because JW's have a "more scriptural than thou" schtick towards other christians which is trivially easy to poke at as an outsider.   You've been backpedaling since the words fell from your mouth....it's unbecoming, and at the end of the day I won't believe any more or less on account of whatever you have to say to salvage that schtick, eh?

The scriptures -also- clearly state that there are no other gods..neither I nor JW's accept their authority in that regard- and that's okay.  You needn't defend that article of faith (I don't expect you to be able to), it is not that article of faith, in truth, that my comments are aimed at, now is it?  It is the staggering duplicity of faith and indoctrination which I'm referring to, not the woeful inaccuracy of faiths creeds and conclusions.

(you couldn't say it, though, could you, you couldn't - now- say "jesus is a true god, satan is a false god", lol...gee, I sure hope he wasn't watching and listening......   )

You don't respond to my counterpoints, so I am done when it comes to these subjects with you

[Lemonvariable72]

My few questions here. First off jw's believe in gods predetermination right? If so let me ask you this. Why would a all knowing god create a gay man then sentence gay men to suffer via stoning? If it is a choice for people to be gay then why have the rather extensive psychological tests and experiments shown otherwise?
No follow along here, lets presuppose for a minute that the god of the bible might not be real. Who would be more apt to write rules regarding human homosexuality? A ignorant bronze age man that feels a innate sense of disgust at homosexual act or a omnipotent god with an entire universe to tend to?

[Foxaèr]

Dear JW,

My question depends more upon your frame of mind than my restraint.

It all depends upon whether or not you are willing to understand that fiction and reality both have distinct definitions and that in no way does your witness hold sway over reality.

Are you willing to hear my question upon the intingent that you may be wrong?

If you cannot accept in any form that you are wrong in your beliefs, then inform me why I should even ask this question that will absolutely stump you?

Go ahead, ask me.

[Tonus]

Yes it is true that a JW would let their child die after all other means have been explored. This is more and more not the case as bloodless surgery wings have sprung up all over the world. Bloodless surgery is actually viewed as the golden standard these days.

This is true, but there is a practical reason behind it. Blood is usually in short supply and any methods that can lessen (or even eliminate) the need for blood transfusions is beneficial. JWs have helped in a slightly morbid way, by providing test subjects in the more extreme cases (though usually not children, but adults making a conscious decision). In many cases, children may still be forcibly transfused if the risk is considered to be high enough. And the Watchtower Society has, over the years, made so many concessions in terms of which parts of the blood can be transfused, that it might not be a shock to hear that they overturn the policy completely in the future.

[Won2blv]

Here's another attempt to help you Nic This is an opinion I have formed, and I openly admit it may be totally wrong.

It's obvious you are very conflicted at the moment. I think part of you really wants the religious claims to be true, for emotional reasons, and so you don't then have to consider you may have been wrong for such a long time. I think this desire is making you hop back and forwards between the atheist and the believer, between examining the evidence and feeling the bible must be true.

I'm not trying to influence your decision, only you can make the journey. It doesn't matter to me whether people become open atheists or not. I'm just trying to give you some more points to think about. Like I said, I may be wrong

Thanks rob but you have to understand that god makes more sense to me logically than emotionally. The number one emotional thing driving me has been discussed already in another thread. In the end I'll probably come out of this as a deist. But if people want to argue the bible with me then I want them to answer my questions logically. Not just, "you only read the scriptures you want" or "you don't even understand what you're talking about"

[Won2blv]

 And the Watchtower Society has, over the years, made so many concessions in terms of which parts of the blood can be transfused, that it might not be a shock to hear that they overturn the policy completely in the future.

I don't think so. They have made concessions but I think this is because of the principle to not be adding any unnecessary burdens. Blood particles are found in so many medicines that it would be unreasonable for a laymen in medicine to really discern what they're using. Like if someone got bit by a snake, are they really going to have the state of mine to ask about the antivenom that often has blood particles? But the medical community has moved towards a bloodless surgery standard that I think will make blood transfusions almost always obsolete in the future. Blood has become a big business too. Many of those blood drives end up just being a way for the company to make millions VIA arbitrage. I heard about it on a Radiolab or Planet Money podcast

[The Grand Nudger]

Your "counterpoint" Nica, was to flip flop on the text and your own words asking that I quote where you made the claim...which I did.  You seem to be hitting defense mode as though my comments are aimed at disproving JW doctrine....you misunderstood me, clearly. Perhaps, if you took a step back from that very common, very understandable reaction...you'd see our conversation in a different light?

[Won2blv]

My few questions here. First off jw's believe in gods predetermination right? If so let me ask you this. Why would a all knowing god create a gay man then sentence gay men to suffer via stoning? If it is a choice for people to be gay then why have the rather extensive psychological tests and experiments shown otherwise?
No follow along here, lets presuppose for a minute that the god of the bible might not be real. Who would be more apt to write rules regarding human homosexuality? A ignorant bronze age man that feels a innate sense of disgust at homosexual act or a omnipotent god with an entire universe to tend to?

No we don't believe in predetermination. The JW's have commented for many years that homosexuals could have been born they way they are. But that it isn't a proper rationalization to ok it. Its compared to someone having a propensity to alcoholism. Or really even a guy or girl lusting after someone of the opposite sex that isn't theirs. JW's don't believe that the world condition is the way god purposed

[Won2blv]

Your "counterpoint" Nica, was to flip flop on the text and your own words asking that I quote where you made the claim...which I did.  You seem to be hitting defense mode as though my comments are aimed at disproving JW doctrine....you misunderstood me, clearly.  Perhaps, if you took a step back from that very common, very understandable reaction...you'd see our conversation in a different light?

Whatever I'll say, you'll just keep telling me what I am DOING not what I am SAYING. And you'll also just tell me that I am biased so I am just going to say whatever to defend my beliefs. You can't have a reasonable conversation with someone in that situation. 

[The Grand Nudger]

You -are- biased...so am I.  Whats the problem?  We can both accept and understand that about ourselves, I'm sure?  I don't know -what- you're doing...beyond what you do here.  I'm not sure where you intended to take that.  Are you angry that I've called you out on flip-flopping?  Perhaps you shouldn't have done that, then....what does that have to do with me, though?

You aren;t going to say "whatever" - you're going to respond in the manner that you've been taught to respond (same as I). That's what I expect, that's how it's played out thusfar. Our previous conversation was, essentially, scripted (an thank the RCC for it). I knew your answers before you gave them because those are "the JW answers". Aren't they? Anyone who's ever asked themselves "how are JWs different" would have very quickly arrived upon the answer with very little research. Christology. The christology of differing sects is -inferred- from the text, rather than directly stated. If it were directly stated, there would be no such subject as "christology". When orthodox sects run their inference, they come up with a trinity, when JWs run their inference, polytheism.

-It's just two different ways of making sense of a potentially contradictory claim.- Each seems absurd to the other group (both seem absurd to me).

What is it, other than the above...that you think I'm hoping to establish about JW or orthodox doctrines?

I appreciate, btw, that JW appeals to you logically...we hear that alot, though. I'd love to explore how you came to believe through logic, or how you maintain your beliefs through logic? Were you (*or your family) late converts, argued into the Hall? Or, if you're 2nd gen (or further) at what point did you reappraise the faith of your fathers logically....and what does an appraisal like that look like?

(I think, btw, that if it's emotional reasons driving you, your faith in god is safe. No matter how much I wish something weren't true, that never has the power to make it so, in my experience. I presume you have a similar experience? I doubt that you'll actually be able to drive yourself out of JW doctrine that you know..logically, for example..to be true...simply because you don't like it. You will still believe, you will still be a JW...you will simply be unrepentant, apostate. -and very, very lonely.)

Hey, here's a good one for you, additionally, give you a chance to expound upon a portion of the faith which you'll find near unanimous acceptance and praise for. Tell the peanut gallery why JW's refuse to bare arms?