Jehovah`s Witness/Eddie, And Continued Dishonesty In "Quoting"....
Eddie's lies and dishonesty, seem to know no limits.
After asking his strange question "Who was Mr. Holland arguing with"
, over and over, I finally decided to answer his ridiculous question.
I did so here....
But what Eddie did next, is a testament to his complete lack of morals, and willingness to misquote and lie.
I'd like to hear his explanation for this, and why he would do something this dishonest in public........
Eddie FINALLY came back with a response, to my answer of his question, "Who was Mr. Holland arguing with?"
Only problem is, he SELECTIVELY quoted from my post, and intentionally left out the ANSWER to his question, and then of all things...claims I didn't answer it. Yes, after omitting the part where he was answered.
No doubt, he felt this was the Christian thing to do, and that Jehovah would approve of his telling some more lies, in an attempt to attack an "apostate". I mean, if there's anything that's clear in the Bible, its what Jehovah thinks of a lying tongue.
But its interesting...In his "reply" to Rando/himself, he proceeds to quote the first 5 paragraphs of my post. Then, for whatever unexplainable reason, he LEAVES OUT numerous paragraphs, only to begin quoting AGAIN, 8 more paragraphs from later on down in the writing. And then, he finally omits the final part altogether.
And after quoting only a portion of my writing, and omitting several portions, he makes this false statement....
"So any clear answer? Did you see it?
What's the answer to this simple question?
Who said "not just some" are saved by God?
You know why he didn't answer this very simple but specific question?
Because he knew he got caught. He got caught in his own web of lies. Simple."
I didn't answer because I "got caught in a web of lies"? No actually, Eddie just couldn't admit he was beaten, and tried desperately to hold onto his distortion of a statement about JW salvation, that was never even made. Eddie is full of pride like that, and doesn't like to admit defeat...even when its obvious.
But its odd that he would lie, and claim I didn't answer his question in the very writing that he was presuming to "quote", yet the question WAS directly answered...In the part he omitted, no less.
Let me quote what Eddie didn't....
"So, who was I “arguing with”, in this statement….“God wants ALL men to be saved...not just some.”
Simple…No one. This particular statement, as ALREADY explained, was tied in with the previous one….“He is not Mediator for merely 144,000 select individuals, but He is Mediator for ALL men.”
In fact, Ed, I notice you normally don’t like to quote the entire paragraph, but instead, seem to like to zero in on one statement in that paragraph. Why is that? Is it because that, when the statement is placed in its original context, that your false accusation is demolished?
So, let’s just quote the statement IN ITS CONTEXT, as it originally appeared, in this link….
“But He will come...make no mistake about it. And everything we see happening in this world today, only indicates that the time is getting closer and closer. I would encourage everyone reading, to be ready to meet God.”
“And there is only one way to do that.… Not by coming to any church or religious Organization, regardless of whatever boastful claims they make about themselves, but by placing complete faith and trust in the shed blood of Jesus Christ. There is ONE Mediator between God and men, and that Mediator is not a religion or a church ....It is Jesus Christ. He is not Mediator for merely 144,000 select individuals, but He is Mediator for ALl men. God wants ALL men to be saved...not just some.”
Now, this is clearly an appeal to the readers, to be ready for the return of Jesus Christ, followed by HOW the Bible outlines to be ready, as contrasted with the teachings of the WT, on how to be ready for “the end”.
Eddie wants to isolate one statement out of context, in a desperate attempt to discredit me, all because he was made a fool of previously, for claiming that we (Christendom) “hate Jehovah’s name”, and then was asked questions about WHY we would write and sing songs about it, if this were true. So, Eddie was still reeling from that one, and was quite upset. He got desperate….and he only dug his hole deeper.
Eddie is a prime example of what happens, when a person is driven by hate, and a desire for revenge.
Nonetheless, he can’t just separate the statement “God wants ALL men to be saved ...not just some” , from the rest of the paragraph. The paragraph itself, WAS an argument against the false Watchtower teaching, that Jesus is only Mediator for the 144,000, and not all of mankind. It was also an "argument" against ANY group that places itself in the equation of salvation, in addition to belief in Jesus Christ. Not every individual statement was an “argument” against the WT exclusively…. The entire paragraph collectively, was making a reference against their teaching….Not on how many will be saved, but on how many can claim Christ as Mediator.
Actually, if he wants to play that little game, then let’s just break the paragraph down, and ask the same question “Who is Mr. Holland arguing with?” , to EACH statement individually. Wonder why Eddie didn’t do that?
Let's start with the first statement......
“And there is only one way to do that.… (being ready to meet God)
Now, WHO is that statement “arguing” with, Eddie? Why didn’t you also claim that I was saying that JWs teach that there are several ways to be saved? Must not have occurred to you, I guess.
Or, is it just possible that I was simply making that statement, as a foundation for the rest of what I wanted to say? Does each statement individually, have to be an “argument”, in and of itself?
Next statement….“Not by coming to any church or religious Organization, regardless of whatever boastful claims they make about themselves, but by placing complete faith and trust in the shed blood of Jesus Christ.”
Who was this statement “arguing” with, Ed? Jehovah’s Witnesses, Catholics, Mormons? Actually, all of the above, but not limited to all of the above. This statement was contradicting ANY religion that claims you have to come to them or their group, to be a true Christian.
So, why didn’t you isolate this statement, as well? Simple…Because even you know this was a broad statement, not aimed at any one particular group.
Next statement….“There is ONE Mediator between God and men, and that Mediator is not a religion or a church....It is Jesus Christ.”
Who is this one “arguing” with, Eddie? Again, ANY religion or church that places itself into the equation.
Now, I guess that settles that. Eddie lied and claimed he wasn't answered, but what I read above, was a pretty direct answer to his stupid question..."Who was Mr. Holland arguing with?"
Eddie, it really isn't right or honest to say someone didn't answer, after intentionally EDITING OUT where they did answer.
But thanks for again, showing your complete lack of morality or character. This is only about the 50th such blunder like this that you have made, over claiming I have never said something that was actually said quite clearly.
I will expect a prompt apology.
But unlike your squawking about my "not answering your question" when I certainly did, let's get back on the subject of the question YOU won't give a "clear answer" to.....
"Did the Watchtower ever teach that Jesus "invisibly returned" in 1874?