The “obvious fallacy” occurs when “words like absolutely, undoubtedly, certainly, it is only reasonable to conclude and so forth are substituted for logical reasons.”[1]
Using such words or phrases isn’t always wrong, but we need to be careful to examine whether they are being used as a substitute for evidence and logic.
Here are three examples from Watchtower literature. Continue reading
“Confused definition” means, “A biblical term is misunderstood in such a way that an essential biblical doctrine is distorted or rejected.”[1]
Let’s look at several Watchtower examples.
I won’t go into detail refuting each one. Rather, my goal will be to identify them so you will know the sort of thing to look out for. Continue reading
Using a reductio ad absurdum, Walter Martin demonstrated how, by collapsing contexts, we can make the Bible seem to teach anything:
“Twisted translation” can be defined as follows: “The biblical text is retranslated, not in accordance with sound Greek scholarship, to fit the preconceived teachings of a cult.”[1]
The Watchtower publishes its own version of the Bible, calling it “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures.” Jehovah’s Witnesses consider it to be the best translation of the Bible available. It is the only one they will really trust.
Unfortunately, key passages have been mistranslated in order to support Watchtower theology. Continue reading
In arguing against the deity of Christ, Jehovah’s Witnesses sometimes cite John 1:18: “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” (KJV)
The Watchtower’s argument essentially is as follows:
Let’s consider how to answer them using some soundbites. Continue reading
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑
