Jesus Name - Proof of the GB's Deceptive Teaching of the Faithful Slave

Status
Not open for further replies.

SusanB

Well-known member
I think you will find Kevin that “liking” in this context is simply acknowledging an agreement in principle, restricted as we are to show agreement in any other way on this site. It is also used to register support. Most here recognise and allow for the view of others, but Robert has to answer for every little detail he writes and defend his understanding against all-comers. It is a lonely job to stand against all-comers
I‘m guilty of liking likes. I do like many comments just to say thank you for interacting and sharing your viewpoint. It doesn’t necessarily mean I agree.
 
K

KevinB

Guest
Yeah, maybe I did...at least I'm reading the comments and I do LIKE them, HONEST. Besides that's only your opinion anyway. What are you doing...overseeing and counting everyone's LIKES or just mine?

And I thought you were a nice guy KevinB.
Look at your first comment on this topic, and you were first to comment, until Robert elevated his above yours. Read your own words. After Robert posted his reply to my topic you switched and counseled me. I don't dislike you at all, but I do hate when people stradle between two opinions. No one asked you to pick a side did they? Why did you flip and lecture me? I don't surf this topic to be nasty, and I never called anybody a name.

The reason this topic exploded is because RK began to argue the GB really didn't deny Christ by their new doctrine of the FS. But I disagreed because they do confer who the members of the royal priesthood are when they demand the anointed recognize their position. Don't recognize their position and they will not view those of the anointed who deny them as being genuinely anointed. I lived that experience personally. And to call me delusional for wanting to warn people of this GB decepption was absolutely wrong.

I've had to apologize on this site when I went overboard, hopefully it's still in your vocabulary and that of others.
 

Ms_ladyblue

Well-known member
Look at your first comment on this topic, and you were first to comment, until Robert elevated his above yours. Read your own words. After Robert posted his reply to my topic you switched and counseled me. I don't dislike you at all, but I do hate when people stradle between two opinions. No one asked you to pick a side did they? Why did you flip and lecture me? I don't surf this topic to be nasty, and I never called anybody a name.

The reason this topic exploded is because RK began to argue the GB really didn't deny Christ by their new doctrine of the FS. But I disagreed because they do confer who the members of the royal priesthood are when they demand the anointed recognize their position. Don't recognize their position and they will not view those of the anointed who deny them as being genuinely anointed. I lived that experience personally. And to call me delusional for wanting to warn people of this GB decepption was absolutely wrong.

I've had to apologize on this site when I went overboard, hopefully it's still in your vocabulary and that of others.
What was my first comment about Quinzz, if you don’t mind me asking? We had various discussions back and forth…
 
K

KevinB

Guest
What you have put forth here doesn't prove that the GB has denied Christ. If you are going to sound the warning to eight million JWs I would hope you have a more convincing case.
Well apparently I'm a "demon" and shouldn't speak any more. What do you think?
 

Watchman

Moderator
Staff member
The reason this topic exploded is because RK began to argue the GB really didn't deny Christ by their new doctrine of the FS. But I disagreed because they do confer who the members of the royal priesthood are when they demand the anointed recognize their position. Don't recognize their position and they will not view those of the anointed who deny them as being genuinely anointed. I lived that experience personally. And to call me delusional for wanting to warn people of this GB decepption was absolutely wrong.
I did not necessarily say that the GB does not deny Christ. My point was that you personally did not present a very convincing argument. More correctly the GB has elevated itself to the level of apostles and has diminished Christ as the head, but that is not the same as denying Christ. That said, I do teach that an antiChrist will emerge from the leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses during the conclusion. And I also get the last word on this thread. ;)



 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top