I recommend you look at the larger context here.
I started the post about the Trinity. I know the current workers (and the workers when I was growing up here in Australia) did not teach or preach or believe in the Trinity as it is properly understood.
Believe me, no one was more surprised than me to see the notes on Truth Archive that appeared to support it.
I am an ex. I left the meetings partly because of their false teaching. So it is dishonest, misleading and tacky to represent on here that I support the worker's false teachings in any way. I do not.
Myself and a couple of other exes who also believe in the Trinity were trying to explore the possibility that there may have been a drift in teaching over the decades away from an early assumed understanding of the trinity (even if it wasn't clearly preached), as a number of hymns prior to 1987 appear to retain fragments of trinity-friendly lyrics.
So it was part of a speculative, not a dogmatic process. Some people on here seem to be just as dogmatic and deliberately misleading as the workers in putting your point across....
I recommend that anyone who wants to see the full discussion IN CONTEXT actually read it all the way through.
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index