"Full" debate with a Jehovah's Witness "Letusreason1234" on the two class theology

Unfortunately, Letsureason backed out of the debate half way through without any notice.  I was really hoping we'd make it through to the end, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a JW would act this way when 99.9 percent of them are nameless and faceless on the internet.  Anyway, i've posted what we did of the debate, which I hope to be useful to some people.  If you watch or listen until the end, i'll provide a short post-debate commentary.

You can watch the debate HERE

You can listen to the debate HERE

1st rebuttal in my debate with Letusreason1234

See Letusreason1234's opening statement HERE.

This is my first rebuttal in our debate:

Debate with Letusreason1234: My opening statement

As mentioned over a month ago, I will be debating a JW who goes by the nick, Letusreason1234.  However, we couldn't seem to agree on the method by which we'd approach this debate so we decided to do this on YouTube via video responses.  Assuming the full debate will be completed, i'll make an audio download as well as a full length video of the debate.  Here is my opening:

Review of the March 2012 Watchtower Study Edition

In this review, I focus primarily on Romans 8 and a unique interpretation provided by the Watchtower as it relates to their "two class" theology.  I also discuss some other elements of interest in the same article.

You can watch the review HERE

You can listen to the review HERE

You can download the March 2012 Watchtower Study Edition HERE

On a side note, i'm very much considering doing a podcast in the near future.  The reason being, i'm realizing that far more people are out there who are just like me with little time to read and a lot of time to listen.  I've got the necessary equipment to do it, but my audio acoustics (as you can tell) are pretty awful in my current living situation.  But that is going to change soon, Lord willing (so long as my next place doesn't have hard wood floors and thin walls!).

Anyway, doing reviews of Watchtowers like this might make for a good podcast in addition to debates and dialogues. I'm just brainstorming out loud right now, so we'll see what happens.

Upcoming Debate with a Jehovah's Witness

My JW friend Letusreason1234 has recently agreed to a formal debate with me.  The debate will be formulated a bit differently than most but the outcome will be the same.  That is, we will be exchanging our videos back and forth so that both sides can articulate the best possible arguments without being put on the spot.  However, there will be live cross examination.  But I think this style of debate will be a good example for those who don't think they can debate because they aren't good debaters.  Hopefully, the full debate will be posted by the end of the month.  It will be in both video and audio form.  The proposition and format will go as follows:

Proposition: There is only one class of Christians with one eternal hope

Affirmative: Mike Felker

Negative: Letusreason1234

Opening Statements (20 minutes each)

Rebuttals (12 minutes each)

Rebuttals (8 minutes each)

Cross examination round 1 (7 minutes each)

Cross examination round 2 (7 minutes each)

Rebuttals (10 minutes each)

Closing Statements (7 minutes each)

2nd discussion with JW "Letusreason1234" on the eternal hope of Christians

Like our FIRST DISCUSSION, this one will continue along the same lines in contrasting the Jehovah's Witness view with what I believe to be the biblical view of all Christians living forever on the new earth.

You can watch the discussion HERE

You can listen to the discussion HERE

Discussion with a JW on the eternal hope of Christians

Recently, I had another discussion with a Jehovah's Witness on the eternal hope of Christians.  The Watchtower teaches that there will be a literal group of 144,000 anointed Jehovah's Witnesses who rule with Christ in heaven over the rest of Jehovah's Witnesses who will live on a paradise earth.  However, I believe in accordance with the Scriptures that all Christians will live forever on the new earth.

You can watch the interaction HERE

You can listen to the interaction HERE

Lord willing, we will be having more interactions like these in the near future.

Correcting a miscitation from my interaction with the JW

I finally got around to listening to the INTERACTION I had with the JW from the other day and was overall pleased with how it went.  I won't go into reviewing or offering much critique in this post as I would like the viewers to decide for themselves (at least for now anyway).

But I did notice a blunder I made at about 41:30 where I attempted a paraphrase of the following quote:

*** w57 5/1 p. 284 par. 14 Trust Your Proved, Faithful Brothers ***

Showing respect for Jehovah’s organization really resolves itself down to our attitude toward God’s visible channel and the trust that we place in our proved, faithful brothers. If we have become thoroughly convinced that this is Jehovah’s organization, that he is guiding and directing his people, then we shall not be unsettled by anything that happens. If something comes up that we do not understand we will wait patiently until it is made thoroughly clear to us. If we feel sure something is wrong we will ‘keep the commandment’ of our Father and take whatever theocratic steps are open to us and then wait on Jehovah. We will not ‘forsake our mother’s teaching’ by immediately beginning to criticize and find fault. We will realize that Jehovah knows what is going on in his organization, and if he is willing to permit it, who are we to insist it should be different? If we really have faith, we will know that if it is wrong he will straighten it out eventually, and we are far safer inside his organization even with these minor difficulties than we would be on the outside where only chaos and destruction await us.

What I paraphrased went something as follows: "If we come to believe that something the Watchtower teaches is false, then we should just believe what they say anyway."  Of course, the part in bold contradicts this and is consistent with what my JW friend said whereby one should keep quite about it and let Jehovah straighten it out.  While I think that there are still some significant theological and psychological disagreements that I have with the above, I didn't represent it accurately.

However, i'm kicking myself now because there is a quote that appears to be consistent with what I paraphrased that I wish I would have used:

*** w52 2/1 pp. 79-80 pars. 11-12 Jehovah’s Theocratic Organization Today ***

We must show our understanding in these matters, appreciating our relationship to the visible theocratic organization, remembering the fate of those like Korah and Achan and Saul and Uzziah and others who forgot the theocratic order. Are we assigned as individuals to bring forth the food for the spiritual table? No? Then let us not try to take over the slave’s duties. We should eat and digest and assimilate what is set before us, without shying away from parts of the food because it may not suit the fancy of our mental taste. The truths we are to publish are the ones provided through the discreet-slave organization, not some personal opinions contrary to what the slave has provided as timely food. Jehovah and Christ direct and correct the slave as needed, not we as individuals. If we do not see a point at first we should keep trying to grasp it, rather than opposing and rejecting it and presumptuously taking the position that we are more likely to be right than the discreet slave. We should meekly go along with the Lord’s theocratic organization and wait for further clarification, rather than balk at the first mention of a thought unpalatable to us and proceed to quibble and mouth our criticisms and opinions as though they were worth more than the slave’s provision of spiritual food. Theocratic ones will appreciate the Lord’s visible organization and not be so foolish as to pit against Jehovah’s channel their own human reasoning and sentiment and personal feelings. 

12 Now some may ask, Should we accept as from the Lord and true the food provided through the discreet slave, or should we withhold acceptance until we have proved it for ourselves? If we have gained our present understanding of the Bible by feeding at the table set by the slave, if we have been thereby freed from false doctrines and built up in the clean and undefiled worship of God and given a new world hope, we should have some confidence in the slave’s provisions. After being nourished to our present spiritual strength and maturity, do we suddenly become smarter than our former provider and forsake the enlightening guidance of the organization that mothered us? “Forsake not the law of thy mother.” (Prov. 6:20-23) And if the heavenly Father would not give a stone or serpent or scorpion to a child who asked for bread or fish or an egg from him, are we to take the spiritual food he provides through the slave into our hands as if we were going to be bruised by a stone or bitten by a serpent or stung by a scorpion? (Matt. 7:7-11; Luke 11:9-13, NW) Are we to be doubtful and suspicious about each new provision? “He who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven by the wind and blown about. In fact, let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from Jehovah.” (Jas. 1:6, 7, NW) Even the Beroeans first received Paul’s preaching “with the greatest readiness of mind”, and then went to “carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so”. (Acts 17:11, NW) This was the first real contact the Beroeans had with Paul’s preaching, yet they received it readily and then studied the Scriptural support for themselves. How much more readily we can receive the slave’s provisions with confidence, since, unlike the Beroeans, we have much past experience with the precious provisions from the slave. After receiving these food supplies we prove their Scripturalness for ourselves to make the message our own, in a spirit of meekness and trustfulness and not combativeness.

Its difficult not to underline nearly every sentence in this quotation because I think this well illustrates the point I was trying to make.  If a JW comes to question the correctness of something the WT teaches, what is he expected to do as a faithful JW? Hold silently to what he firmly believes as true?  No.  Instead, this one should "have some confidence in the slave's provisions," because we are not, "more likely to be right than the discreet slave."  Therefore, "we should meekly go along with the Lord's theocratic organization and wait for further clarification."

Unless i'm missing something, the faithful JW is expected to go along with what the WT teaches, even if it questionable or something we feel is incorrect.  After all, they're smarter than us, right?

Discussion with a Jehovah's Witness "WorldHistory2011" on Independent Thinking

Just last evening I had a most interesting encounter with a JW.  But this wasn't just any encounter; it was recorded.  It all started with the following comment on THIS VIDEO:

But was it a "complete lie?"  Though my comment in 2:25 of that video was made in passing (the subject of the video was something different), I backed up my claim by referencing the following Watchtower quotation:

*** km 9/07 p. 3 Question Box ***

Does “the faithful and discreet slave” endorse independent groups of Witnesses who meet together to engage in Scriptural research or debate?—Matt. 24:45, 47.

No, it does not. And yet, in various parts of the world, a few associates of our organization have formed groups to do independent research on Bible-related subjects. Some have pursued an independent group study of Biblical Hebrew and Greek so as to analyze the accuracy of the New World Translation. Others explore scientific subjects related to the Bible. They have created Web sites and chat rooms for the purpose of exchanging and debating their views. They have also held conferences and produced publications to present their findings and to supplement what is provided at our Christian meetings and through our literature... Thus, “the faithful and discreet slave” does not endorse any literature, meetings, or Web sites that are not produced or organized under its oversight. 

 What transpired was a 45 minute discussion with WorldHistory2011.

Go HERE to watch the encounter.

Go HERE to listen to the encounter.

What was expected to happen in 1914?

*** w89 4/15 pp. 6-7 par. 8 The Infamous Harlot—Her Fall ***

⁸ For some 40 years the Bible Students boldly proclaimed that the year 1914 would mark the end of the Gentile Times. As expected, that year brought world-shaking events, not the least of these being the first world war. 

One has to wonder how the Watchtower can portray their own history in this light.  But then again, many JW's and non-JW's reading the literature may be unaware of its history of failed predictions.  Therefore, such ones would see no reason to question these commendations.

However, when one considers the nature of the actual predictions made pre-1914, it would be difficult to deny that such words are not an accurate portrayal.  Some may even conclude that such a misrepresentation of pre-1914 predictions are nothing short of dishonest.

Compare the above quotation to what was really said about 1914:

“The date of the close of that ‘battle’ is definitely marked in Scripture as October, 1914.  It is already in progress, its beginning dating from October, 1874.” –Zion’s Watch Tower Jan. 15, 1892 p. 22 

“We see no reason for changing the figures—nor could we change them if we would.  They are, we believe, God’s dates, not ours.  But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble.  We see no reason for changing from our opinion expressed in the View presented in the Watch Tower of Jan. 15, ’92.  We advise that it be read again.” –Zion’s Watch Tower, July 15, 1894 p. 226 

“True, it is expecting great things to claim, as we do, that within the coming twenty-six years all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved…In view of this strong Bible evidence concerning the Times of the Gentiles, we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the Kingdom of God, will be accomplished at the end of A.D. 1914.” –The Time is at Hand (1908 ed.) p. 99 

“Be not surprised, then, when in subsequent chapters we present proofs that the setting up of the Kingdom of God is already begun, that it is pointed out in prophecy as due to begin the exercise of power in A.D. 1878, and that due ‘battle of the great day of God Almighty’ (Rev. 16:14), which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth’s present rulership, is already commenced.” –Time is at Hand (1911 ed.) p. 101

It should be readily obvious to anyone that there was more going on than predictions merely about "world shaking events" and the "end of the gentile times."  Thus, what happened in 1914 was not expected, contrary to what the Watchtower would have us believe according to the above quotation.  On the contrary, what was expected was "the complete overthrow of earth's present rulership."