Follow the Christ Convention – JWs

It has been so long since I have been ambushed at my front door by the Jehovah’s Witnesses – in fact, they haven’t been at my place in the entire time I have lived here. I did get them when I lived a couple of suburbs away and then quite regularly. However, this didn’t continue when it became apparent to them that I was a ‘recalcitrant Reformed Baptist.’ They of course tried many tricks to get me to listen to them then, including trying to get a glass of water for the little girl with them – I can only imagine how much water this poor little girl got throughout the round of door knocking that day.

So today they have arrived and departed in quick time – it being really cold out today and blowing quite strongly as well. Anyhow, it was long enough for a leaflet to be pressed into my hand before I knew what had happened ~ and then she was gone.

Anyhow, it was an invite to attend the ‘Follow the Christ!’ Convention in Sydney from the 3-5 August 2007. It promises to have a ‘sound drama’ based on Mark chapters 4 and 5, whatever that is, as well as a ‘full-costume Bible drama’ based on Colossians 3:12 (it would be interesting to see what they would do with that).  There will also be a ‘six-part, fast moving symposium’ on the Sermon on the Mount, whatever that means.

I did of course screw the thing up before thinking I could have a look at it and make a Blog entry about it – I am quite content to have as little to do with the Jehovah’s Witnesses movement as possible. Should I have more of an open mind? No, I don’t think so at all – if I had that, it would surely indicate that I wasn’t convinced about my current position (which I am). I have no need to entertain cultic groups and their teaching, not even for a moment.

Some may think that that approach is somewhat arrogant; however, when you are convinced of what God is teaching through His Word, it is both somewhat foolish and arrogant to go against what He has set down. Indeed it would be arrogant rebellion against Him to adopt that or to entertain that which the Lord God has not taught. What He has made plain it is my duty to cling to and hold dear.

This narrow-minded approach is surely the way of the Christian, for there are not many ways but only one way, according to the God of the Bible. It is because of this that we do not pursue a myriad of varying (and oftentimes contradicting) approaches to religion, for the true religion of the Bible knows but one way – God’s. There is no other.

One thought on “Follow the Christ Convention – JWs

  1. These comments appeared in a previous blog site:

    posted by: TheRockSays (reply)
    post date: 07.23.07 (7:55 pm)

    Do you know what’s behind that “glass of water” thing JWs do? I remember my mother telling me they did that w/her, and she suspected a trick, went through with it anyway, but nothing seemed to come of it.
    I have to disagree with such a narrow-minded approach. If you are convinced of your current position, you should be confident that it would hold up against criticism. That’s the thing about Christianity: it’s survived empires, liberal theology, corruption, tolerance, intolerance, freethinking, liberalism, church splits, and it’s not showing any signs of going away. Islam, on the other hand, owes it’s endurance to conquest and very swift action to dissent.


    posted by: Daniel (reply)
    post date: 07.24.07 (7:20 am)

    If you are so convinced you have the true Christian faith, you may firstly like to know that Jesus’ heavenly Father, God, has a name that appears some 7000 times in the original manuscripts, Jehovah. How can one claim to know the true religion without accepting and declaring the name of the author? The JWs carry out their ministry via the door to door work as instructed by Jesus at Matthew 28:19,20. We are preaching about the Kingdom Jesus came to earth to teach about and to warn everybody including you and yours that there is huge evidence to support the fact we are living in the last days as described at Matt 24 and at 2 Tim 3:1-5. As your Bible knowledge will no doubt tell you, the great tribulation – armageddon – is to come in these last days. So please do not think the JWs have some trick up their sleeve or that we are a cult trying to convert. There is no motive for this as the organisation is supported entirely by voluntary contributions. If there was anything sinister I would’ve found it by now. If you believe nothing I’ve included thus far, please think what these scriptures mean: Acts 15:14 says “God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name.” A people for his name. Romans 10:13 clearly states: “EVERYONE who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.” Check the front and/or back of your Bibles. It should discuss how His name had been removed. If you have the KJ version, look up Ps 83:18. Even better, if you’re so convinced you have all the knowledge you need, why not go to the Follow The Christ convention if it hasnt passed by? After all, if you come away thinking it’s rubbish then you’ll never have to worry about God’s witnesses again.


    posted by: (reply)
    post date: 07.25.07 (4:59 am)

    Reply to: DAniel. I was trying to get excerpts from the convention because I went but we had a difficult time because it was so crowded in Long Beach.(Our convention)My husband is disabled and he had a weak moment and got angry on the way home( This really upset me because he cursed out the gas attendant) He is baptized and this upset me because I dotn want to be a reproach to Jehovah. HE is a great god and has blessed us wonderfully!Its a great tthing to witness about Jehovah! Thats what were trying to do.Im glad I listened when someone came to my door! No we are not perfect but listen to the message. Look at the heavens what a wonderful earth he created for us. How wonderful that he has a plan because man can only mess up things. Praise to Jehovah!!!!!!!!!!!!


    posted by: bushman (reply)
    post date: 07.28.07 (10:33 pm)

    I don’t suppose it would surprise anyone to see that I have had JWs disagree with me – and that is fine. They ae entitled to disagree with me and to post their thoughts here if they should like to do so.

    Still, my position remains unchanged by such comments. Why go to something that is ran by a group that holds doctrines that are not correct according to the overall theological context of the Bible? Why be entertained or tantilised by false teachers? It would certainly be wrong to do so and be against the Scriptural warnings that are very clear about such false teachers. Keep clear of them and have nothing to do with them.


    posted by: Mal (reply)
    post date: 08.03.07 (5:33 am)

    Anyone know where the location of the convention is in Sydney this weekend.


    posted by: Daniel (reply)
    post date: 08.14.07 (2:12 am)

    Reply to: bushman.

    Firstly, I agree with you that everyone should make up their own mind after considering the evidence. However you contradicted yourself in the same post by telling people to have nothing to do with the Witnesses. That is clearly not your place but every individuals.

    Secondly, you mention doctrines not in line with the Bible? Are you talking about Christendom’s trinity -the 3 headed God? Are you in support of teh Catholic Church who recently paid out $660 million to abuse victims at the hands of their Priests? Or perhaps you are not at all well versed in the Scriptures, otherwise you would know that the theme of the Bible is constant – The Hebrew scriptures details prophecies relating to the Messiah, who ‘came to take sin away from the world’ by paying back the ransom of the perfect life Adam lost for us. The Greek scriptures contain the fulfillment of these prophecies thereby proving Jesus Christ was the Messiah, God’s Son, (Luk 23:21-22 – Voice from heanven: This is my son, whom I have approved) and the theme carries on until Revelation when Jesus rules as King of the Kingdom (government) that will never be brought to ruin (as prophecied in Dan 2:44), bringing perfection and everlasting life back to those who support God’s side, and doing away with ‘the wicked one’. The theme is about the issue of God’s sovereignty (or right to rule) being proved and settled. The Bible clearly states: “The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one” at 1 John 5:19. Look around the world, does it ring true?

    For those who want to know the truth please bear this scripture in mind: Jesus spoke of only two choices. He said: “Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.” (Matthew 7:13, 14)

    I will no longer comment on these websites. I urge people not to search the web for info on JWs but to see what they are about for themselves. Make your own mind up. – This is the official beliefs. We are witnesses of Jehovah – God – witnesses of teh evidence in the Bible that his purpose to step in is to happen soon. And he will carry out his original purpose to turn the Earth into a paradise and allow us to live forever if we do what he requires of us.


    posted by: bushman (reply)
    post date: 08.20.07 (7:09 pm)

    Another comment from a Jehovah’s Witness no doubt, or at least one who leans towards their errors, as is obvious by the denial of the Bible-based doctrine of the Trinity. How that can possibly be tied to Roman Catholicism’s abuse of children (or more correctly stated – abuse by some in authority in the Roman Catholic Church) is illogical to me.

    As to having nothing to do with cults – well, that appears a fairly clear teaching of Scripture. So I am content with my position on that. My mind is captive to the Word of God and not to the teachings and/or thoughts of the cults and their supporters. I would advise others to have the same approach, regardless of the comments made by cultic sympathisers.


    posted by: (reply)
    post date: 08.23.07 (2:23 am)

    There is no mention of the word ‘Trinity’ in the Bible whatsoever. How can Jesus be equal to God if “God loved the world so much that he SENT his only-BEGOTTEN son.” ?


    posted by: bushman (reply)
    post date: 08.24.07 (4:21 am)

    The word ‘Trinity’ doesn’t need to actually appear to be true and real. It is clear from the early chapters of Genesis that there is a plurality in Jehovah. He is even described as conversing within Himself ; ‘Let us make man in Our Image.’

    Now this has been debated over the years and the case for the doctrine concerning the Trinity has been ably put forward by many pastors and theologians and does not need to be proven again by me here. Those who don’t hold to this teaching revealed clearly in the Scriptures are not going to be convinced by me, so I see little point in a fruitless debate with the Jehovah’s Witnesses and their supporters on this point.


    posted by: (reply)
    post date: 09.05.07 (4:29 am)

    IF PEOPLE were to read the Bible from cover to cover without any preconceived idea of a Trinity, would they arrive at such a concept on their own? Not at all.

    What comes through very clearly to an impartial reader is that God alone is the Almighty, the Creator, separate and distinct from anyone else, and that Jesus, even in his prehuman existence, is also separate and distinct, a created being, subordinate to God.

    God Is One, Not Three

    THE Bible teaching that God is one is called monotheism. And L. L. Paine, professor of ecclesiastical history, indicates that monotheism in its purest form does not allow for a Trinity: “The Old Testament is strictly monotheistic. God is a single personal being. The idea that a trinity is to be found there . . . is utterly without foundation.”

    Was there any change from monotheism after Jesus came to the earth? Paine answers: “On this point there is no break between the Old Testament and the New. The monotheistic tradition is continued. Jesus was a Jew, trained by Jewish parents in the Old Testament scriptures. His teaching was Jewish to the core; a new gospel indeed, but not a new theology. . . . And he accepted as his own belief the great text of Jewish monotheism: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one God.'”

    Those words are found at Deuteronomy 6:4. The Catholic New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) here reads: “Listen, Israel: Yahweh our God is the one, the only Yahweh.”* In the grammar of that verse, the word “one” has no plural modifiers to suggest that it means anything but one individual.

    The Christian apostle Paul did not indicate any change in the nature of God either, even after Jesus came to the earth. He wrote: “God is only one.”—Galatians 3:20; see also 1 Corinthians 8:4-6.

    Thousands of times throughout the Bible, God is spoken of as one person. When he speaks, it is as one undivided individual. The Bible could not be any clearer on this. As God states: “I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to no one else shall I give my own glory.” (Isaiah 42:8) “I am Yahweh your God . . . You shall have no gods except me.” (Italics ours.)—Exodus 20:2, 3, JB.

    Why would all the God-inspired Bible writers speak of God as one person if he were actually three persons? What purpose would that serve, except to mislead people? Surely, if God were composed of three persons, he would have had his Bible writers make it abundantly clear so that there could be no doubt about it. At least the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures who had personal contact with God’s own Son would have done so. But they did not.

    Instead, what the Bible writers did make abundantly clear is that God is one Person—a unique, unpartitioned Being who has no equal: “I am Jehovah, and there is no one else. With the exception of me there is no God.” (Isaiah 45:5) “You, whose name is Jehovah, you alone are the Most High over all the earth.”—Psalm 83:18.


    posted by: Fred (reply)
    post date: 09.22.07 (11:52 pm)

    Jesus is God’s Word become flesh. A man is never without his Word let-a-lone a God without His Word. God is love in 1 John. How does love exist in a non-relational God? JWs spend so much of their time trying to give God everything they can, whether it be their morality or their works. You can’t give the God who has everything, anything. Maybe if JWs understood the fullness and satisfaction God has in Himself through the doctrine of the trinity, they wouldn’t be slaves to an organisation.


    posted by: Facts (reply)
    post date: 10.01.07 (1:54 am)

    How Did the Trinity Doctrine Develop?

    AT THIS point you might ask: ‘If the Trinity is not a Biblical teaching, how did it become a doctrine of Christendom?’ Many think that it was formulated at the Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E.

    That is not totally correct, however. The Council of Nicaea did assert that Christ was of the same substance as God, which laid the groundwork for later Trinitarian theology. But it did not establish the Trinity, for at that council there was no mention of the holy spirit as the third person of a triune Godhead.

    Constantine’s Role at Nicaea

    FOR many years, there had been much opposition on Biblical grounds to the developing idea that Jesus was God. To try to solve the dispute, Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea. About 300, a fraction of the total, actually attended.

    Constantine was not a Christian. Supposedly, he converted later in life, but he was not baptized until he lay dying. Regarding him, Henry Chadwick says in The Early Church: “Constantine, like his father, worshipped the Unconquered Sun; . . . his conversion should not be interpreted as an inward experience of grace . . . It was a military matter. His comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear, but he was sure that victory in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians.”

    What role did this unbaptized emperor play at the Council of Nicaea? The Encyclopædia Britannica relates: “Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance with the Father’ . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.”

    ‘Fourth century Trinitarianism was a deviation from early Christian teaching.’ —The Encyclopedia Americana

    Hence, Constantine’s role was crucial. After two months of furious religious debate, this pagan politician intervened and decided in favor of those who said that Jesus was God. But why? Certainly not because of any Biblical conviction. “Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology,” says A Short History of Christian Doctrine. What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain.

    None of the bishops at Nicaea promoted a Trinity, however. They decided only the nature of Jesus but not the role of the holy spirit. If a Trinity had been a clear Bible truth, should they not have proposed it at that time?

    Further Development

    AFTER Nicaea, debates on the subject continued for decades. Those who believed that Jesus was not equal to God even came back into favor for a time. But later Emperor Theodosius decided against them. He established the creed of the Council of Nicaea as the standard for his realm and convened the Council of Constantinople in 381 C.E. to clarify the formula.

    That council agreed to place the holy spirit on the same level as God and Christ. For the first time, Christendom’s Trinity began to come into focus.

    Yet, even after the Council of Constantinople, the Trinity did not become a widely accepted creed. Many opposed it and thus brought on themselves violent persecution. It was only in later centuries that the Trinity was formulated into set creeds. The Encyclopedia Americana notes: “The full development of Trinitarianism took place in the West, in the Scholasticism of the Middle Ages, when an explanation was undertaken in terms of philosophy and psychology.”

    The Athanasian Creed

    Norway. Trinity (Father, Son, holy spirit), c. 13th century C.E.

    THE Trinity was defined more fully in the Athanasian Creed. Athanasius was a clergyman who supported Constantine at Nicaea. The creed that bears his name declares: “We worship one God in Trinity . . . The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet they are not three gods, but one God.”

    Well-informed scholars agree, however, that Athanasius did not compose this creed. The New Encyclopædia Britannica comments: “The creed was unknown to the Eastern Church until the 12th century. Since the 17th century, scholars have generally agreed that the Athanasian Creed was not written by Athanasius (died 373) but was probably composed in southern France during the 5th century. . . . The creed’s influence seems to have been primarily in southern France and Spain in the 6th and 7th centuries. It was used in the liturgy of the church in Germany in the 9th century and somewhat later in Rome.”

    So it took centuries from the time of Christ for the Trinity to become widely accepted in Christendom. And in all of this, what guided the decisions? Was it the Word of God, or was it clerical and political considerations? In Origin and Evolution of Religion, E. W. Hopkins answers: “The final orthodox definition of the trinity was largely a matter of church politics.”

    Apostasy Foretold

    THIS disreputable history of the Trinity fits in with what Jesus and his apostles foretold would follow their time. They said that there would be an apostasy, a deviation, a falling away from true worship until Christ’s return, when true worship would be restored before God’s day of destruction of this system of things.

    “The Triad of the Great Gods” Many centuries before the time of Christ, there were triads, or trinities, of gods in ancient Babylonia and Assyria. The French “Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology” notes one such triad in that Mesopotamian area: “The universe was divided into three regions each of which became the domain of a god. Anu’s share was the sky. The earth was given to Enlil. Ea became the ruler of the waters. Together they constituted the triad of the Great Gods.”

    Regarding that “day,” the apostle Paul said: “It will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed.” (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7) Later, he foretold: “When I have gone fierce wolves will invade you and will have no mercy on the flock. Even from your own ranks there will be men coming forward with a travesty of the truth on their lips to induce the disciples to follow them.” (Acts 20:29, 30, JB) Other disciples of Jesus also wrote of this apostasy with its ‘lawless’ clergy class.—See, for example, 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 4:1-3; Jude 3, 4.

    Paul also wrote: “The time is sure to come when, far from being content with sound teaching, people will be avid for the latest novelty and collect themselves a whole series of teachers according to their own tastes; and then, instead of listening to the truth, they will turn to myths.”—2 Timothy 4:3, 4, JB.

    Jesus himself explained what was behind this falling away from true worship. He said that he had sowed good seeds but that the enemy, Satan, would oversow the field with weeds. So along with the first blades of wheat, the weeds appeared also. Thus, a deviation from pure Christianity was to be expected until the harvest, when Christ would set matters right. (Matthew 13:24-43) The Encyclopedia Americana comments: “Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.” Where, then, did this deviation originate?—1 Timothy 1:6.

    What Influenced It

    THROUGHOUT the ancient world, as far back as Babylonia, the worship of pagan gods grouped in threes, or triads, was common. That influence was also prevalent in Egypt, Greece, and Rome in the centuries before, during, and after Christ. And after the death of the apostles, such pagan beliefs began to invade Christianity.

    Historian Will Durant observed: “Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. . . . From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity.” And in the book Egyptian Religion, Siegfried Morenz notes: “The trinity was a major preoccupation of Egyptian theologians . . . Three gods are combined and treated as a single being, addressed in the singular. In this way the spiritual force of Egyptian religion shows a direct link with Christian theology.”

    Thus, in Alexandria, Egypt, churchmen of the late third and early fourth centuries, such as Athanasius, reflected this influence as they formulated ideas that led to the Trinity. Their own influence spread, so that Morenz considers “Alexandrian theology as the intermediary between the Egyptian religious heritage and Christianity.”

    In the preface to Edward Gibbon’s History of Christianity, we read: “If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism. The pure Deism of the first Christians . . . was changed, by the Church of Rome, into the incomprehensible dogma of the trinity. Many of the pagan tenets, invented by the Egyptians and idealized by Plato, were retained as being worthy of belief.”

    A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge notes that many say that the Trinity “is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and ingrafted on the Christian faith.” And The Paganism in Our Christianity declares: “The origin of the [Trinity] is entirely pagan.”

    That is why, in the Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings wrote: “In Indian religion, e.g., we meet with the trinitarian group of Brahma, Siva, and Visnu; and in Egyptian religion with the trinitarian group of Osiris, Isis, and Horus . . . Nor is it only in historical religions that we find God viewed as a Trinity. One recalls in particular the Neo-Platonic view of the Supreme or Ultimate Reality,” which is “triadically represented.” What does the Greek philosopher Plato have to do with the Trinity?


    PLATO, it is thought, lived from 428 to 347 before Christ. While he did not teach the Trinity in its present form, his philosophies paved the way for it. Later, philosophical movements that included triadic beliefs sprang up, and these were influenced by Plato’s ideas of God and nature.

    The French Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel (New Universal Dictionary) says of Plato’s influence: “The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher’s conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions.”

    The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge shows the influence of this Greek philosophy: “The doctrines of the Logos and the Trinity received their shape from Greek Fathers, who . . . were much influenced, directly or indirectly, by the Platonic philosophy . . . That errors and corruptions crept into the Church from this source can not be denied.”

    The Church of the First Three Centuries says: “The doctrine of the Trinity was of gradual and comparatively late formation; . . . it had its origin in a source entirely foreign from that of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures; . . . it grew up, and was ingrafted on Christianity, through the hands of the Platonizing Fathers.”

    By the end of the third century C.E., “Christianity” and the new Platonic philosophies became inseparably united. As Adolf Harnack states in Outlines of the History of Dogma, church doctrine became “firmly rooted in the soil of Hellenism [pagan Greek thought]. Thereby it became a mystery to the great majority of Christians.”

    The church claimed that its new doctrines were based on the Bible. But Harnack says: “In reality it legitimized in its midst the Hellenic speculation, the superstitious views and customs of pagan mystery-worship.”

    In the book A Statement of Reasons, Andrews Norton says of the Trinity: “We can trace the history of this doctrine, and discover its source, not in the Christian revelation, but in the Platonic philosophy . . . The Trinity is not a doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, but a fiction of the school of the later Platonists.”

    Thus, in the fourth century C.E., the apostasy foretold by Jesus and the apostles came into full bloom. Development of the Trinity was just one evidence of this. The apostate churches also began embracing other pagan ideas, such as hellfire, immortality of the soul, and idolatry. Spiritually speaking, Christendom had entered its foretold dark ages, dominated by a growing “man of lawlessness” clergy class.—2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7.

    Hindu Trinity The book “The Symbolism of Hindu Gods and Rituals” says regarding a Hindu trinity that existed centuries before Christ: “Siva is one of the gods of the Trinity. He is said to be the god of destruction. The other two gods are Brahma, the god of creation and Vishnu, the god of maintenance. . . . To indicate that these three processes are one and the same the three gods are combined in one form.”—Published by A. Parthasarathy, Bombay.

    Why Did God’s Prophets Not Teach It?

    WHY, for thousands of years, did none of God’s prophets teach his people about the Trinity? At the latest, would Jesus not use his ability as the Great Teacher to make the Trinity clear to his followers? Would God inspire hundreds of pages of Scripture and yet not use any of this instruction to teach the Trinity if it were the “central doctrine” of faith?

    Are Christians to believe that centuries after Christ and after having inspired the writing of the Bible, God would back the formulation of a doctrine that was unknown to his servants for thousands of years, one that is an “inscrutable mystery” “beyond the grasp of human reason,” one that admittedly had a pagan background and was “largely a matter of church politics”?

    The testimony of history is clear: The Trinity teaching is a deviation from the truth, an apostatizing from it.


    posted by: JOANN (reply)
    post date: 03.25.08 (6:04 am)

    I find it curious that ‘bushman’ has much to say w/no scriptural backing. That’s what the early Christians did: “So according to Paul’s custom he went inside to them, and for three sabbaths he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving by references…” (Acts 17:2,3)


    posted by: bushman (reply)
    post date: 03.29.08 (3:07 am)

    I find it interesting that the JWs need to twist the Scriptures so that there position seems clear from them. These false teachers have always done and it shouldn’t surprise anyone that the JWs and their supporters also do the same. Any study of church history (as the above comments suggest should perhaps be undertaken) will show that those who held to the same beliefs as modern day JWS were exposed clearly from the Scriptures as being false teachers. A study of these writings will show this to be so.

    Also, a study of the current breed of JWs and their roots will clearly show a trail of falsehood and lies, as well as refuted false teachings.

    I would expect that all manner of JW supporting material will be dumped in the comments section here and at other places – an attempt to overwhelm visitors with a whole pile of propaganda.

    My dear visitors, please be careful of the JW arguments you find here and search the Scriptures that you be not deceived by that which seems plausible. Pay particular attention to the ‘Scripture verses’ they quote, checking them with proven reliable versions of the Scriptures. Do not rely on their translators or you will be led astray.


    posted by: gLareHeemidem (reply)
    post date: 05.15.08 (9:55 am)

    Hello my friends 🙂


    posted by: outsightman (reply)
    post date: 06.18.08 (12:27 pm)

    Reply to: bushman


    posted by: Free Chat (reply)
    post date: 07.20.08 (7:50 pm)

    I found this blog on a google search and boy am I glad I did. I thought I heard someone mention it in a free chat room.
    Awesome read!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.