Scripture verses JWs have problems with?

[T_More]

A new commandment I give unto you: That you love one another, as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another.

That’s the one.

1. It’s a command from Jesus- your God.

He’s yours as well. You just don’t know it. Go read John 20:28, or do you not follow the words of one of Christ’s own Apostles?

1. Those who love one another don’t kill one another.

Strawman agrument (again). Much killing was done in God’s name in the Old Testament. Does God change? If one kills in self defense, or to protect the rights of others, does God show mercy?

1. War after war in history with Catholics killing Catholics, abetted by chaplains ordained by the Church, paid by the governments. (Mt 6:24)

**Abetted? Really? Did not Aaron and Moses slaughter 3000 at the foot of Mt Sinai? You’re reaching, noprem. God does not change.

The bible tells us there is a time for war:

Ecclesiastes 3:8 “[There is] a time to love and a time to hate; a time for war and a time for peace.”

**

1. Showing hatred, not love? Certainly not disciples of Jesus, then.

**From your founder, Charles Taze Russell’s own writings:

“There is no command in the Scriptures against military service. It would be quite right to shoot, not to kill.” Zion’s Watch Tower 1898 Aug. 1 p.231

“There could be nothing against our conscience in going into the army. Wherever we would go we could take the Lord with us, the Captain of our salvation, and wherever we would go we could find opportunities to serve him and his cause.” Zion’s Watch Tower 1903 Apr. 15 p.120
“In accordance with the resolution of Congress of April 2nd, and with the proclamation of the president of the United States of May 11, it is suggested that the Lord’s people everywhere make May 30th a day of prayer and supplication. … As says the spirit through the Apostle Paul: “I exhort, therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour.” (I Timothy 2:1-3) Let there be praise and thanks-giving to God for the promised glorious outcome of the war, the breaking of the shackles of autocracy, the freeing of the captives (Isaiah 61:1) and the making of the world safe for the common people–blessings all assured by the Word of God to the people of this country and of the whole world of mankind.” Watchtower 1918 June 1 p.174

Your own religion has flip flopped on this. I know, the “light gets brighter”…

**

How many times must your God speak to you before you listen to him?

**How many times must you be asked by myself and others why you won’t show where the faithful & discreet slave has been for 2000 years as claimed by the WTBS?

How many different ways does Christ have to state that His Church would endure forever? It can’t be the JW’s, so who is it, noprem? Could it be that you are following the tradtions of men, such as Russell, Rutherford, Knorr and Fred Franz?

The more you ignore me, the worse you look, and the more you prove my case all the more.

**

And here are my only questions for you that Jehovah thinks are worth discussing:
Is Ps 37:29 a true prophecy? If so, how do you intend to make yourself part of it?

This doesn’t prove that you are part of Christ’s own Church.

 

[noprem]

From what little I know of JW, it would see that virtually the entire Gospel according to St. John would be somewhat of a stumbling block for them. Steven

Sorry I didn’t see this sooner. You say, “I don’t know how badly they’ve mangled the translation in the NWT, because I don’t have a copy. I should probably get one since there are many JW’s where I live, and I’ll sooner or later be able to witness to some.”
Write to Watchtower, 25 Columbia Heights, Brooklyn, NY 11201-2483. Ask to be sent a New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, followed by a visit (so you’ll have time to look it over).

You say, “I’d love to go through the entire gospel of St. John, verse by verse with ANY heretical entity who still values holy writ”
You don’t need an NWT for that. There are many verses the plain language of which show that not Jesus nor John the Evangelizer nor John the Baptist believed that Jesus and Jehovah are the same person. The prepositions should indicate that to you, as they would to any fifth-grade English class. Here are some from the RC New American Bible, Saint Joseph Edition:
v.1 the Word was in God’s presence [not *in God]
v.14 The Word *not God!] *became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we have seen his glory: The glory of an only Son coming from the father …
v. 29 The next day, when John caught sight of Jesus coming toward him, he exclaimed: "Look! There is the Lamb of God …
v. 32,33 John gave this testimony also: "I saw the Spirit descend like a dove from the sky, and it came to rest on him. But I did not recognize him. The one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘When you see the Spirit descend and rest on someone, it is he who is to baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ Now I have seen for myself and have testified, ‘This is God’s chosen one.’ "
v. 36 As he watched Jesus walk by he said, “Look! There is the Lamb of God!”
v. 41 The first thing he did was seek out his brother Simon and tell him, “We have found the Messiah!” (This term means the Anointed.)
[All Bible references to anointed ones show that person being anointed by another, separate person. Anointer anoints the anointee, or anointed.]
v. 49 “Rabbi,” said Nathanael, “you are the Son of God;…”
And that’s just the first chapter. I believe this is an adequate response to your comment, “the whole gospel of St. John is a declaration in the strongest and most straightforward measure of the unquestionable divinity of Jesus and His being the second person of the Holy trinity”

In fact, though, my experience with trinitarians is that they read only John 1:1, and only one clause in the sentence at that: “and the Word was God”. The offer that in response to John’s writing everywhere else in his Gospel (above), to the fact that the key statement “second person of the Holy trinity” is found nowhere in the Bible, and to the fact that another clause of John 1:1 (quoted above) cannot be true if Jesus is Jehovah.
Others have objected that these conversations took place before Jesus was glorified in Heaven, so ‘of course we don’t see him as God yet’. But John wrote his Gospel after the Resurrection and Glorification, and his Apocalypse reads the same:
Rev 1:1 This is the revelation God gave to Jesus Christ, that he might show his servants what must happen very soon …
1:5 and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness (!), the first-born from the dead and ruler of the kings of earth … who has made us a royal nation of priests in the service of his God and Father …
And v.5 tallies with John’s quote of Jesus’ statement at 3:12:
I will make the victor a pillar in the temple of my God and he shall never leave it. I will inscribe on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which he will send down** from heaven**, and my own name which is new.
The words in bold face are translated “from my God” in the other translations I have, including Jerome’s Vulgate: de caelo a Deo meo

You say, “I don’t suppose they accept Greek (NT) and Hebrew (OT) as the source languages do they? Otherwise it seems you could just pick apart the the NWT for them with the real Greek and Hebrew words, and that would be too easy, I suppose.”
Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic are the source languages. No “acceptance” required. Also well known- even to trinitarians- is that the original manuscripts were written in Uncial: all capital letters; no spaces between words. Therefore the “trinitarian” part of John 1:1 should be “accurately” translated as
INTHEBEGINNINGWASTHEWORDTHEWORDWASINGODSPRESENCEANDTH-EWORDWASGOD
Thus any modern capitalization is the translator’s choice. You weren’t told that by your teachers- why not?

BTW I don’t predict success for your search, given your attitude toward the searching. You say “From what little I know of JW” and “verse by verse with ANY heretical entity”. If you know little, why not keep an open mind until you know more?

 

[Nicea325]

noprem:

In fact, though, my experience with trinitarians is that they read only John 1:1, and only one clause in the sentence at that: “and the Word was God”. The offer that in response to John’s writing everywhere else in his Gospel (above), to the fact that the key statement “second person of the Holy trinity” is found nowhere in the Bible, and to the fact that another clause of John 1:1 (quoted above) cannot be true if Jesus is Jehovah.

More 19th century JW nonsense! The above has been rebuked a million times. And NO WHERE does scripture teach the Holy Spirit is a THING or FORCE!

 

[PRmerger]

A new commandment I give unto you: That you love one another, as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another.

Catholics respond with a hearty to the above. However, it does not say anything at all about the Bible being “superior”, which was what you were asked to provide a verse for.

It does seem that your claim here

Originally posted by noprem: My direct personal experiences with the mainstream religions, and comparing them with the Bible’s teachings, has shown me the vast difference between them, and of the superiority of the Bible.

is a man-made non-Scriptural tradition you’ve embraced. You heard someone say it, who probably heard someone else say it, but when it comes down to the matter, the original source of this tradition is found …somewhere…but NOT IN ANY PAGE OF THE BIBLE. The Bible does not teach it is superior.

[SIGN1]Your claim of the “superiority of the Bible” has no Bible verse to back it up, noprem. :sad_yes:
[/SIGN1]

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

As an observer on this thread, I’m getting very tired of T More’s question being avoided and not answered. I, and I think speak for other observers as well, want his question expounded on by any JWs here.

noprem, answer T More’s question, please, or your argument is folly. In any debating arena, avoiding an extremely important question destroys your case completely, so address it to restore your position in this thread.

If you need it spelled out again, where was the faithful and discreet slave before Russell came?

Pax

 

[jesuspsr]

As an observer on this thread, I’m getting very tired of T More’s question being avoided and not answered. I, and I think speak for other observers as well, want his question expounded on by any JWs here.

noprem, answer T More’s question, please, or your argument is folly. In any debating arena, avoiding an extremely important question destroys your case completely, so address it to restore your position in this thread.

If you need it spelled out again, where was the faithful and discreet slave before Russell came?

Pax

 

[StevenFrancis]

Sorry I didn’t see this sooner. You say, “I don’t know how badly they’ve mangled the translation in the NWT, because I don’t have a copy. I should probably get one since there are many JW’s where I live, and I’ll sooner or later be able to witness to some.”
Write to Watchtower, 25 Columbia Heights, Brooklyn, NY 11201-2483. Ask to be sent a New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, followed by a visit (so you’ll have time to look it over).

You say, “I’d love to go through the entire gospel of St. John, verse by verse with ANY heretical entity who still values holy writ”
You don’t need an NWT for that. There are many verses the plain language of which show that not Jesus nor John the Evangelizer nor John the Baptist believed that Jesus and Jehovah are the same person. The prepositions should indicate that to you, as they would to any fifth-grade English class. Here are some from the RC New American Bible, Saint Joseph Edition:
v.1 the Word was in God’s presence [not *in God

]
v.14 The Word *not God!] *became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we have seen his glory: The glory of an only Son coming from the father …
v. 29 The next day, when John caught sight of Jesus coming toward him, he exclaimed: "Look! There is the Lamb of God …
v. 32,33 John gave this testimony also: "I saw the Spirit descend like a dove from the sky, and it came to rest on him. But I did not recognize him. The one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘When you see the Spirit descend and rest on someone, it is he who is to baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ Now I have seen for myself and have testified, ‘This is God’s chosen one.’ "
v. 36 As he watched Jesus walk by he said, “Look! There is the Lamb of God!”
v. 41 The first thing he did was seek out his brother Simon and tell him, “We have found the Messiah!” (This term means the Anointed.)
[All Bible references to anointed ones show that person being anointed by another, separate person. Anointer anoints the anointee, or anointed.]
v. 49 “Rabbi,” said Nathanael, “you are the Son of God;…”
And that’s just the first chapter. I believe this is an adequate response to your comment, “the whole gospel of St. John is a declaration in the strongest and most straightforward measure of the unquestionable divinity of Jesus and His being the second person of the Holy trinity”

In fact, though, my experience with trinitarians is that they read only John 1:1, and only one clause in the sentence at that: “and the Word was God”. The offer that in response to John’s writing everywhere else in his Gospel (above), to the fact that the key statement “second person of the Holy trinity” is found nowhere in the Bible, and to the fact that another clause of John 1:1 (quoted above) cannot be true if Jesus is Jehovah.
Others have objected that these conversations took place before Jesus was glorified in Heaven, so ‘of course we don’t see him as God yet’. But John wrote his Gospel after the Resurrection and Glorification, and his Apocalypse reads the same:
Rev 1:1 This is the revelation God gave to Jesus Christ, that he might show his servants what must happen very soon …
1:5 and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness (!), the first-born from the dead and ruler of the kings of earth … who has made us a royal nation of priests in the service of his God and Father …
And v.5 tallies with John’s quote of Jesus’ statement at 3:12:
I will make the victor a pillar in the temple of my God and he shall never leave it. I will inscribe on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which he will send down** from heaven**, and my own name which is new.
The words in bold face are translated “from my God” in the other translations I have, including Jerome’s Vulgate: de caelo a Deo meo

You say, “I don’t suppose they accept Greek (NT) and Hebrew (OT) as the source languages do they? Otherwise it seems you could just pick apart the the NWT for them with the real Greek and Hebrew words, and that would be too easy, I suppose.”
Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic are the source languages. No “acceptance” required. Also well known- even to trinitarians- is that the original manuscripts were written in Uncial: all capital letters; no spaces between words. Therefore the “trinitarian” part of John 1:1 should be “accurately” translated as
INTHEBEGINNINGWASTHEWORDTHEWORDWASINGODSPRESENCEANDTH-EWORDWASGOD
Thus any modern capitalization is the translator’s choice. You weren’t told that by your teachers- why not?

BTW I don’t predict success for your search, given your attitude toward the searching. You say “From what little I know of JW” and “verse by verse with ANY heretical entity”. If you know little, why not keep an open mind until you know more?

Neprem: Your comments to me are well presented, and it did make one important impact on me. Not one of theology, I’m afraid, but one of personal character. You revealed to me, the uncharitable nature of the manner in which I tend to post my thoughts on these types of matters. It has been humbling indeed to look at my own posting here broken up in this way, and then dealt with in calm, and charitable manner, even though your hold a strongly dissenting theology from my own. This is instructive, and I’m actually grateful for this. You’ve also shown a strong belief in your understanding of things which is an admirable modelling of your faith.

God bless,

Steven

 

[Pepband_Mom]

noprem

NWT 1984 ed. by WTBTS page 1327:

…“and the Word was a god.”

The Kingdom INTERLINEAR TRANSLATION of the Greek Scriptures 1969 ed. by the WTBTS page 417

…“and god was the Word.” to the left of page beneath the greek

and …“the Word was a god.” on the right side where the WT offers their translation that doesn’t match up with the Greek.

FINALLY,

THE BIBLE in Living English 1981 ed. by WTBTS page1365 SAYS THE FOLLOWING:

“At the first there was the Word, and the Word was where God was, and the Word was God.”

Apparently, there is confusion amongst these editions all printed by the WTBTS.

Can you explain this noprem?

 

[Pepband_Mom]

noprem lots of thoughts here.

WHAT IS HIDDEN IN THE OLD (TESTAMENT) IS REVEALED IN THE NEW (TESTAMENT) (hear that from Catholic radio speakers all the time)

See Deut 6:4 “Hear, O israel: The Lord thy God is one.” from the Shema

Two words for ONE in Hebrew:
yachid means 1 by itself - like 1 grape
'echad means a 1 but has parts like a bunch of grapes.
(thank you Sr. Rosalind Moss, Jewish convert to Catholicism, raised in Brooklyn)

The Hebrew is 'echad which is a unity of parts, or in this case Persons so the Jews had something here: God is not a single, solitary from their Torah.
God is Love. so cannot be Love without someone to bestow it on. So Loves the Word from the “beginning”. and the Love between them is the Holy Spriit.

He IS and HAS EVERYTHING WITHOUT US, without having to LOVE US! Not dependent on mankind & creation in ANY WAY or HE would not BE GOD.

How could GOD exist as LOVE completely by HIMSELF, alone, that is no SON/WORD or HOLY SPIRIT from the BEGINNING? (In the beginning…)

P.S. The WTBTS has been in BROOKLYN for decades where probably the largest Jewish population outside of Israel lives. How tough would it have been to meander down the street, sit down with some Rabbis & dialogue?

St. JEROME went to a HEBREW congregation, learned the language & translated the scriptures into LATIN, THEN turned around & learned Greek & translated that as well CENTURIES AGO. He went to the SOURCE.

noprem see my prior post on John 1:1

A ? about your “Translating Committee”

WHERE are the credentials mentioned of your translating committee?
Where did they study & what degrees did they obtain?
Study under distinguished profs?
How published are they?
Archeological experience?
Every live in Bible lands or even travel there?
How many languages are they FLUENT in?
etc.

Or do they only have a High School diploma? If so, WHY are they “TRANSLATING” the BIBLE & WHY should YOU TRUST their ATTEMPTS at BIBLE TRANSLATION ?

They are a bit shy about coming forth with credentials. Every doctor or dentist & most prof person I know has their degrees on the wall. Would you go to a doctor who would not discuss his credentials??? WHY TRUST a committee who has arrived biblically speaking quite late on the scene of bible scholarship; of UNKNOWN ORGIN translating something of SUPERIOR ETERNAL IMPORTANCE as THE BIBLE???

(thanks to to Jason Ever too)

 

[jediliz]

I have the New American Bible Saint Joseph’s edition and Gospel of John Chapter 1 verse one says

In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word WAS GOD.

Verse two says: He was in the beginning with God.

I have this actual bible and that’s what it says!

 

[noprem]

How about if we use the Watchtower, your own publication, to bring up questions regarding JW traditions? and yada yada yada

T More fed you the question. At one time he knew the answer; ask him.

 

[noprem]

noprem Can you explain this noprem?

No “explanation” required. There are translations that use “God” and those which use “a god”. As I’ve shown elsewhere, the uncial Greek was all-caps, so the best mss. cannot be authoritative on this point. Each translator goes his own way depending on (a) exegesis via the rest of the Bible or (b) his own pre-conceptions or both. (One can’t imagine Jerome using a small-g even with his extensive knowledge of languages.)
A related point is that the Gk had no indefinite article in the way we use “a/an”. Again, (a) or (b) or both. BUT the Gk DOES allow for the translation “God” or “[a] god”. Here’s an example from your own Bible:
“And when the barbarians saw the [venomous] beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.”

We are not barbarians, so we know Paul was not God (not Jesus nor Jehovah). So all translators use rules (a) and (b) to write “a god”. Why is that significant? Because the Gk is exactly the same word as the second (controversial) god at John 1:1; not the exact same Greek word as the first “god” in John 1:1. Remember “the Greeks had a word for it”? They certainly did, because slight differences in spelling made subtle but significant changes in the grammatical points of a word. So if we use Acts 28 as our only other guide (I do not), the NWT is correct.
My choice is always to use the Bible to teach the Bible. So I look for a John 1:1 that satisfies- does not destroy- the statements at
John 17:31-3 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father … And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I [Jesus] make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, [which is] new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and * my new name.

So much for the trinity. What do you think of Ps 37:29- Greek, Hebrew or English? The conditions it describes seem very far from the earth we have today; was David perhaps a false prophet? Or should we just have more patience?*

 

[noprem]

Neprem: Your comments to me are well presented, and it did make one important impact on me. Not one of theology, I’m afraid, but one of personal character. Steven

Too bad, it’s the theology that will keep you from knowledge of “the only true God”, which in turn will keep you from life.
“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.”

 

[noprem]

Easy: JESUS CHRIST!

Fine! We interpret the Bible the same way- on this point, at least.
Related question: If ‘all good guys go to Heaven and all bad guys go to Hell’ as the churches teach, then of what use is an earth made so liveable by Jesus? Another view would be, “Of what use will be God’s kingdom on earth. if ‘all good guys etc.’ ?”

 

[noprem]

noprem, answer T More’s question, please, or your argument is folly. In any debating arena, avoiding an extremely important question destroys your case completely, so address it to restore your position in this thread.!!!

(I added the !!! since it seems required by your tone. )
Wow! and Holy Water, Batman! That’s certainly full use of the authority you have- except that men have none in a Bible discussion. “All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”
Sorry.
But hey, you’ll still be popular at K of C meetings.

 

[noprem]

Catholics respond with a hearty to the above. However, it does not say anything at all about the Bible being “superior”, which was what you were asked to provide a verse for.

And here are my only questions for you that Jehovah thinks are worth discussing:
Is Ps 37:29 a true prophecy? If so, how do you intend to make yourself part of it?

 

[noprem]

Re: BIRTHDAYS

Happy 400th birthday
Oops, Happy 400th anniversary, KJV!

 

[PRmerger]

T More fed you the question. At one time he knew the answer; ask him.

It is irrelevant who fed me the question, noprem. Clearly, as T More is an ex-JW, his answer would be: there were no faithful and discreet slaves of Christ in the 1st 19 centuries, which is most likely a great contributor to his exodus.

The answer I am looking for is how a JW responds. It does seem that there is indeed no defense to be made by Jehovah’s Witnesses on this question, which is why you are avoiding it.

But,** if you are going to be a witness, going to homes and knocking on doors, you ought to be able to provide apologia for this question. ** Your silence will not bring about any conversions to your way of thinking.

And, it ought to give you pause: if you cannot answer this question, especially when there is always the possibility that someone who might have converted to the JW religion reads this thread and is awaiting your response, this will not bode well for this potential convert to your religion, eh?

Your silence clearly tells this potential JW convert: ah, so there were no “faithful and discreet slaves” until the 19th century. This does indeed seem peculiar. Especially since it comes from the words of the JW’s founder himself.

 

[T_More]

(I added the !!! since it seems required by your tone. )
Wow! and Holy Water, Batman! That’s certainly full use of the authority you have- except that men have none in a Bible discussion. “All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”
Sorry.
But hey, you’ll still be popular at K of C meetings.

Men have none??

Matthew 28:18-20

18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Matthew 16:17-19

17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and **whatever you bind **on earth shall be bound in heaven, and **whatever you loose **on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

This is plainly authority given to Apostles who were men. And what do you think the keys are a symbol of, noprem?

Revelation 3:7

7 "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: 'The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens.

The holy one spoken about is Christ. Christ has given this key to Peter in Matthew 16 until Christ returns. The correlation between these passages is undeniable.

And how about…

Luke 10:16

16 “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

and…

Romans 13:1-2

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.

These are just a few verses showing that Christ indeed bestowed authority on His Church. In addition, for you to claim otherwise is to saw off the very brach you yourself sit on, because why then is there those of authority in the WTBS?

Using 2 Timothy 3:16-17 does not help your case at all, noprem. The verse does not point to scripture itself as being the sole/final authority. However, 1 Timothy 3:15 claims that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth, so scripture is telling us something other than itself is the authority. Your task is to show that this Church is the governing body of JW’s that has survived for 2000 years as they claim.

 

[PRmerger]

And here are my only questions for you that Jehovah thinks are worth discussing:
Is Ps 37:29 a true prophecy? If so, how do you intend to make yourself part of it?

You are now admitting that no where does the Bible claim to be superior?

As long as you know that you are following a man-made tradition, noprem, then at least you are on the right path to truth. You cannot object to others following their alleged man-made traditions, for you now know that you have your own.

You believe something someone told you, who believed what someone else told him…but no one ever read “the Bible is superior!” in a single page of Scripture.