# GS vs. AF part 1

[ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Mel [Mel] on November 03, 1999 at 14:21:21 {eZOTANvCI60hi4VK0MIQD20u1Ys0Fw}:

I just read GregStafford's response to AF. Whew! Too many words that say too little! Oy Vay!

Just to cut through the chaff quickly:

1. Stafford talks about about JWs claim of uniqueness in studying the bible apart from the creeds of post-biblical Christianity.

Stafford is trying to make JWs sound so super special and unique, but just because they chose DIFFERENT beliefs than mainstream Christianity doesn't necessarily make them BETTER. It doesn't mean that their ideas were any closer to what Jesus had in mind either. In some ways JWs ideas were good in other ways they were awful. So they are no better than other Christian religions. So who cares? AF wins on the first point of the debate.

2. Stafford says that Jehovah uses the accurate parts of what the GB comes up with, but that is just as true of any group that gets something right. So the GB is not special. Chalk up another point to AF.

3. AF asked about the Society's teaching that the GB are God's direct and exclusive representatives. Stafford repeatedly, like a broken record, ad nauseum, berates AF because rank and file are also sometimes called "representatives" in the literature. Well anyone who is honest knew exactly what AF mean't. The GB makes all the rules and decisions--that is what AF was talking about. Rank and file only "represent" what they are told to "represent" by the GB. In other words Stafford avoids the real questions by attempting to side-track everyone. It didn't work. We knew what Alan mean't and Greg surely does too. The final point of round one goes to AF!

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject: *GS vs. AF part 1

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ FAQ ]