Posted by Bibleman [Bibleman] on November 09, 1999 at 10:06:38 {4Hfg918T5gf9UnUPxURUslyACFuF8c}:
In Reply to: Theocratic Warfare posted by Beaver on November 09, 1999 at 09:09:04:
Hi Beave,
Greg Stafford's fall from grace may have only been a partial casuality to the WTS since he doesn't always represent the Society's teachings anyway.
When I was debating with him about Passover he claimed Jesus actually ate a pre-Passover meal, admitting that the traditional Passover was held on Nisan 15th. At first he didn't even think that the WTS was specific about the date the disciples were sent out on Nisan 13th until it was pointed out to him. And he attempted to resolve the problems surrounding the chronology of the Last Supper with hiw own view and not that of the Society's. So he in now way, in this case, represented or defended the Society's official position on this issue. So he's not representing the Society appropriately while putting himself in a position of claiming he is.
It's a total JOKE because he doesn't even know what the Society's views are on topics he tries to defend. It's ridiculous. Who ever heard of someone offering themselves to debate on a position they are not familiar with, and when they do research about that topic and return with a position, it's not even the Society's but that of Christendom? Why did he go to Christendom'scommentaries instead of the Watchtower's for their position on this topic?
It doesn't make sense.
So in no way can he be taken seriously as actually representing the Society's view. He is doing them more harm than good claiming he represents them when he doesn't.
So Greg Stafford should be considered an "individual" speaking for himself and definitely not a representative of an organization of which he doesn't even know their beliefs, yet is offering himself here to debate on their behalf.
The WTS would be wise to totally disown him as representing them, since he doesn't.
Cheers,
Bibleman