Space Merchant

@Patiently waiting for Truth You are in a DEBATE, Butler.
I told you if you make an accusation against a community I am part of, it would come to this, therefore challenge accepted the second you utter a 3rd Truther accusation.
@TrueTomHarley @Witness @Srecko Sostar @Puddlez @Kick_Faceinator @JW Insider @Equivocation and everyone else did not make the such an accusation - ever, in your case, 3 times in succession you made concerning the community.
You have to start with the first segment, hence a debate. You can't put all segments into one for in a debate, segments and or subject matter is of strict focus -  again, you sought out the debate, so now you have to play by the rules of said debate because the spotlight is on both of us. In a debate, facts must be stated, not personal opinions alone. Facts in this activity are anything learned from research by means of article sources and or video, etc. In a segment focused debate, there is no outside help, in this regard, everyone is a spectator for the debate is between you and I.
The first segment is the following
Since I asked the question first, as seen here
 
 
Out of respect in the realm of debate, you can follow the below.

That being said - Respect the Rules of the Debate. For this is a classic because this forum was originally Controversial Posts.
As stated, anything pretraining to Jehovah's Witnesses can't help you here, this is Segment focused debate, so anything pertaining to the Bible or about Truthers and the word Truth can only be focused on.
Since the first question in segment I was presented to you, put forth your information.
 
 

@Srecko Sostar You yourself called out Jehovah's Witnesses for Bible errors several times (The notable one was regards to Judges of Israel), you brought forth again of JW errors in regards to the notation of Basic Knowledge, in this case, their Bible - New World Translation (NWT), I didn't ask you for that other stuff, for we are focused on errors.
Also I am aware that they crafted the NWT, who is not aware? Also I didn't ask you for what JWs are doing now, but if you want to go there - Then in your eyes the JWs are wrong for proclaiming such Bible errors, right? Should the people know? That is for you to speak of in regards to this matter.
Also thank you for confirming who @Patiently waiting for Truth is, for in the past, he made claims he was not John Butler, in fact, even spoke of himself in 3rd person. It didn't take Batman level of Detective work to recognize the textual and speech patterns of Butler, so the fact I refer to him as JB, early on, with his denial and later shows no reaction to it further, practically unmasked him, and this, unmasked him even more.
So I will quote you again:

 
 
If that is what you think, them not being true witnesses, then there should be no issue calling them out for removal of verses or partial changes of verses. @Patiently waiting for Truth brought up an example of what I had addressed to you, but has not shown evidence as to why they made the change, something of which the NWT has often been criticized by certain scholars.
Please address the following that is being asked of you - again, I do not need to do another Glasgow with your comments about errors and translation
To make it easy for you we can start with John 7:53-8:11 and Acts 7:59-60, something of which Jehovah's Witnesses were called out for concerning their Bible, the NWT.
 
 
Again, you and the sources of JWfacts claim that they are in error in regards to Translations. The images were provided by Mr. Cedars, an Ex-Jehovah's Witnesses, whom you follow.

@Alzasior Lutor C'est bien, mais en ce qui concerne Mr. Butler ici, je lui ai dit que s'il faisait une accusation concernant la communauté que je joue un rôle en aidant, cela entraînerait un débat entre lui et moi, et il l'a fait ici.

[Segment I] If you are going to make a reference to me, at least explain to everyone in the class what a Truther is. You will not have a good time using the google searches either because prior to various events in the last 10+ years and the formation groups, the legitimate actions of such persons has been changed, as is with added slander and accusations, many edits, which came to light briefly because of January 6th to the general public.
For I told you, if you are going to make an accusation like that again, you will be debated on it, and you did so in a way that prevents you from seeking aid be it from a JW or an ExJW because they are unaware of the community in question. Now here we are. Granted to go for one, you go for all of them in this regard - and to that I accept the challenge, although didn't doubt you would actually take up the warning.
You can start with [Segment I]
 
The other stuff can be dealt with afterwards. And of course in a debate, no outside help from others on the forum. You'll be speaking as if you are in public discourse, so there is no need to induced anything of your former faith or mention since we will keep it Bible and Fact base only, excluding what a Truther is for that is in regards to a community.
That being said, 
 
As follows:
Segment I - What is a Truther Segment II - What is Truth concerning Scripture Segment III  -  What is the Full Context of Matthew 9:9-13 concerning Matthew in this gospel.

It still does not excuse the New Thought slander. I mean, you did cite Restorationism yourself.
That being said, Basic knowledge in regards to the Bible and the history of Christianity, we can stick with that, especially concerning JWs - we can go with the Bible first. And the fact you bring this up, reminds me of what you stated a while back regarding the Jehovah's Witnesses version of the Bible concerning error - I guess we can start with that, with just 2 questions.
My response to you:
NOTE: Jehovah's Witnesses were spoken of as committing various errors because of their New World Translation (NWT) of the Bible, and they teach that their action on this was because the errors were considered not inspired, hence 2 Timothy 3:16 (All scripture is given by inspiration of God). Not only they were spoken of as removing part of verses, but in their translation, removing a verse/passage entirely.
Concerning errors -  [1] can you explain to me why the Jehovah's Witnesses removed Gospel of John 7:53–8:11 from their translation of the Bible and some have not? Let alone change parts (Partial Verses Omitted) of a verse?
That passage isn't the only example, but we have a few others, as seen below:


 
 
Also they were spoken of as in error for verses like Acts 7:59, 60 and the verses in Matthew, it was even addressed here - 
https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/161040/acts-7-59
[2] Why did the Jehovah's Witnesses make this change to the 2 verses?
 

 
 

@Alzasior Lutor C'est bien, mais en ce qui concerne Mr. Butler ici, je lui ai dit que s'il faisait une accusation concernant la communauté que je joue un rôle en aidant, cela entraînerait un débat entre lui et moi, et il l'a fait ici.

Where is your evidence, Butler?
Also, I am an avid debater, for years in person, online, etc. so an appeal to motive does not work on me, and it does not work on avoiding a question. If you did debates, you'd know to avoid appeals.
For not supporting immoral conduct? again you bring up Truther when it was not mention here, not realizing what it means. The focus on this thread is homosexuality and conduct, you even addressed the view, and the article was presented in full to conclude the focus being the conduct.
It is an example question. But the fact you reacted as such shows your folly. The question was asked to address how you would react in regards to the subject matter - You can still answer that question.

How is acting about their sex life? The question is should you end up in a situation, how would you response. You are a former JW are you not? Why hit the breaks there.
But in situations in regards to the general public you can be asked about this. This is no different from a random guy asking, for example, Anna who is a JW as to why she does not salute the flag and for what reason, likewise as to one can ask why @Kick_Faceinator likes Bill Gates, or @Pudgy why he as a dog for a picture, or, as someone addressed to me, as to why I have a Storm Trooper as a picture - in turn, there is a reason and a why to every response, hence the second question. If COVID-19 kept you under a rock this long, you are forgetting such things arise in interaction with people in society.
Now that is an interesting mindset. Is that what you will say to someone who addressed to you why you do not want to entertain them in their event and or partake in it?
And there is no problem to that. But the focus is on conduct, being a good neighbor has already ben established.
Then why get angry for us calling out conduct? You even equated this to it being a stupid question to ask.
Well if you have been living under a rock for several years, the terms are intertwined with each other, hence modern society.
This is referring to the tax collector in the Gospel of Matthew who later became an associate of Jesus, is the In it, it highlights Jesus’ repeated insistence of mercy in addition to sacrifice. This is the point I made to @Alzasior Lutor already in regards to people fighting off, having enough will power and self control to fight temptation, which is the case with homosexuals who do not want to practice the known conduct in all things in the realm of homosexuality, mainly if such persons seek God. But the verse you are using misrepresents the focus on those who abide by immoral conduct.
 
My comment [Cela étant dit, la position de la Bible est raisonnable et correcte, avec tous les hommes. Il ordonne simplement à ceux qui ont des pulsions homosexuelles de faire la même chose qui est requise concernant la fornication (1 Corinthiens 6:18). Les hétérosexuels qui apprennent à connaître Dieu et sa Parole, se conforment aux normes de la Bible employées appliquent la maîtrise de soi face aux tentations, et en résistant et en se contrôlant, ils font tout ce qu'ils peuvent pour plaire à Dieu, et abandonnent bientôt tout ce qui est mauvais.]
translated reads:
That being said, the Bible's position is reasonable and correct, with all men. He simply commands those with homosexual urges to do the same thing that is required regarding fornication (1 Corinthians 6:18). Heterosexuals who come to know God and his Word, conform to the Bible standards employed, apply self-control in the face of temptation, and by resisting and controlling themselves, they do all they can to please God, and soon give up all that is bad.
 

And as if that wasn't absurd enough.... they use helicopters?
https://streamable.com/kq365d
 

Butler, I am well aware and versed of Textual Analytics. Again, you only brushed the surface. and the question was directed to Srecko, and for a reason - not you. One of the reasons I said you are free to create a topic for that verse. What attitude am I displaying here? The fact that history and Bible Hermeneutics exposes you for having Gnosiophobia/Sophophobia?
That being said, I do have love, being Bible strict does not mean the person lacks love, let alone them being involved with helping missing persons and teaching. I have enough love to avoid misinformation, that of which I abide by.  The fact I do not support the conduct of - same sex marriage, does not mean I lack love. But you have the free will to content to immoral conduct in this regard, which contradicts you even uttering Romans 12:9. Not to mention you evidently ate what Leftism has not reading anything in full.
If I lacked love you'd prove it, but like I addressed before, you could not.
Facts, no, I attest and proclaim history be it Christianity as a whole or the Bible, and the history around to as why it is as such now. I am familiar with history in all respects to various things, even that of the UK, as is with what the MSM is not telling people and or lying in the face of the general public. Reasons for this is because unknown to you, for what I know and the people I have met, they are aware of history being erased and or re written in some respects, even ore damaging for this has poured into the higher education system. This is why in regards to The Trinity and Interfaith, misinformation, falsehood and conspiracy is problematic, and these things I hate. Reasons why when it even comes to misconceptions of faiths, be it JW, Unitarianism, Islam, etc. I point out truth and facts, reasons being because misinformation is often spread among them. Even for Trinitarians, I know my enemy well enough to not fall victim to misconceptions concerning them either. Case and point.
Babylon has swept away the unsuspected, and perhaps it may do the same for you too if not careful.
I will leave it at that. If you want to speak of such claims, make a thread; granted you haven't thus far and shy away from your other on speaks volume.
Also it's Storm Trooper not Storm Trouper.
 

Srecko in all respects you mentioned Basic Knowledge. You called out the Jehovah's Witnesses in error on Scripture before concerning the Bible. Those 2 questions are for you.
It has nothing to do with publications. The images and notes below were from other sources, primarily from JW facts, similar to what you brought forth in the past.
Also of course, no one is inspired, in the same sense as apostles/prophets of old. We already talked about that months ago regarding Prophets Not Inspired.
Anyways, you can take as much time you need with this one since the 2 question are Textual Analytics based:
 

You are closer to their thinking than I am. I can only quote their allegations that could give a possible answer to your question. But since you read their publications yourself, I am convinced that you can guess what the explanation for your objection to their translation of the Bible might be. That in the sense, “we are not inspired", "we are not perfect", "we thought", "Jesus thought" and the like.

A man of God does not support immoral conduct. It isn't about worthiness, but you made it a big deal not resulting the focus was on conduct, hence you lashing out, hence the point made by EVERYONE HERE to you.
Luther, Kick and Pudgy to not like the conduct - case and point.
You are twisting @Pudgy words. His point was it is a waste of time because those who practice the conduct in homosexuality don't bother with God's Word. If a man refused God's word when it is professed, that was his decision based on his free will. This goes as far back as @BroRando's thread about Noah's Day. Noah told the people of what is to come, but they did not care, he continue to the next person, on to the next. Likewise today, but unlike Noah, some listen, but the majority, or anything pertaining to LEFT-WING will never, ever listen. Leftist do not care about what you have to say about God because their ideology is God accepts everyone and their conduct.
But you were pressing everyone here who refused homosexual conduct. You saying this just shows you agree with us all this time, but don't wish to say that you are wrong.
You'd still go to service them food even though you are not involved in the parade as is with commit?
So you agree with what we say about conduct. You were being hypocritical all this time on purpose - God is witness.
It was sourced in the NYT website concerning their events, which I was able to lookup.
But it does not excuse your ignorance to their conduct.
We are focused on the conduct within homosexuality itself. I like how you say this after you show yourself to be in agreement now.
This is beyond JWs, it is people in general, mainly since the article which you linked is Left Wing. A Conservative who isn't religious will tell you the exact same thing, i.e. such as Steven Crowder and or those like him.
Focus was on conduct if you noticed.
Who said we are scared? No one. If you speak of fear, you should have no problem going to a Gay parade if not involved.
Also you didn't answer the second question
Note - You do not have to be a Left-Winger to adhere to their Theology. All they need is you and their influenced put on to you by means of various media and or MSM, hence your reaction to an NYT who is known for using these tactics. They did this in regards to the Pandemic and January 6th. You fell to Alt-Right influence last year concerning to Australia.
 

Patiently waiting for Truth

Roman
1:24  That is why God abandoned them in their inmost cravings to filthy practices of dishonouring their own bodies-
1:25  because they exchanged God's truth for a lie and have worshipped and served the creature instead of the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
1:26  That is why God abandoned them to degrading passions:
1:27  why their women have exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural practices; and the men, in a similar fashion, too, giving up normal relations with women, are consumed with passion for each other, men doing shameful things with men and receiving in themselves due reward for their perversion.
1:28  In other words, since they would not consent to acknowledge God, God abandoned them to their unacceptable thoughts and indecent behaviour.
1:29  And so now they are steeped in all sorts of injustice, rottenness, greed and malice; full of envy, murder, wrangling, treachery and spite,
1:30  libellers, slanderers, enemies of God, rude, arrogant and boastful, enterprising in evil, rebellious to parents,
1:31  without brains, honour, love or pity.
1:32  They are well aware of God's ordinance: that those who behave like this deserve to die -- yet they not only do it, but even applaud others who do the same.
—————————
1 Corinthiens 
6:9  Do you not realise that people who do evil will never inherit the kingdom of God? Make no mistake -- the sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, the self-indulgent, sodomites,
6:10  thieves, misers, drunkards, slanderers and swindlers, none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.
6:11  Some of you used to be of that kind: but you have been washed clean, you have been sanctified, and you have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and through the Spirit of our God.
==================
«But you have been washed clean, you have been sanctified,…»
 
Can you be washed while "practicing" sin?
Don't distort the word of God.
 

That didn't take long....

@Kick_FaceinatorThere was still some interaction between the family and it is obvious of where the mindset is, a Western mindset since the was a Philosophy coined. More so there was a limitation (limited). As pointed out, depending on the person(s), their reaction differs, and granted the every story is Left Leaning, hence NYT, anyone who shows some ill reaction and or not approving of for same sex relationship is automatically branded as homophobic, regardless of religious standing. More so, it lies in the acceptance of the conduct or not - which is clear because the family in question does not accept same sex relationships, thus them being uncomfortable and act in this manner is evident. This is the same case with some of the Bi and Pansexual stories pushed by the Left, granted all their articles concerning the LGBTQ community is to emphasis and push more and more people to accept the person's conduct.

This still isn't an explanation, and again, the question was for @Srecko Sostar. There is a reason as to why the response was made. You, only scratched the surface, just barely.

My questions concerning spoken errors was for @Srecko Sostar, not to you. You are free to make a topic about this verse, if you want a shot at debating that. The subject matter, to him, well to you now, is The Jehovah's Witnesses NWT Bible claims/errors. Granted it stems from the claim of a Restorationist group aligned with Prosperity Preachers, so the 2 questions addressed is for a reason concerning basic knowledge between the two.
That being said, explanation in this regard; the latter can cast the first stone due to his comment.

As pointed out, it is not of my saying, it is the history itself, you are just as much of a Restorationist, as is, the majority of Anti-Trinitarians out there, be it a group or not, mainly in this modern age. What Subordinationism Christianity has birthed, Restorationism, has not changed. There is a deviation of Restorationism, should those accept the creeds instead of speaking out against it.
You're confusing beings with roots. There is a reason why I mentioned roots, as is what it means, something that is an origin or source (as of a condition or quality).
You're deviating from your lie now. Again, you were adamant about those speaking a lie, but to lie about a legitimate rival to Anti-Trinitarian, Jw or not, was willful on your part. I do hope you realize people can see that, especially a multitude of Anti-Trinitarians, for, to this day still battles with those in the prosperity camp, especially in regards to what they did some years ago that resulted in the interfaith nonsense.
Witness, it is slander to call Anti-Trinitarians prosperity preachers, you should have stuck with your false prophet notation instead of equating anything with Anti-Trinitarianism with a slanderous rival of which they dealt with for many, many years. The irony in this you speak of Babylon the Great alone, not realizing a potential threat. Therefore, Kosenen was right about you.
Learn the difference between the two.
You say this every time you evade addressing questions. But if we are to take it there, somehow a former JW adhere to a bit of New Ageism, and deconstruction of God's Order. Or cannot hold their own without the slight mention of a former faith.
So, as to my question, address it - If they're Prosperity Preachers as you said, what is the reason for Jehovah's Witnesses to be preachers let alone adhere to Commission and why they do not believe in the Trinity? 
You are a former JW, are you not? the answer should not be this difficult.
That being said, I find it quite ironic that for your 20 years, yet you proclaimed adhere to a guy, even defended without fact, who said your former faith hid literal poison in the basement of the churches, or perhaps believed in an untruth believing it to be truth, thus professing it yourself. The Biblical Facts thread comes to mind.
You referred to JWs as prosperity preachers, let alone Anti-Trinitarianism. That in of itself is slander.
GB you can speak of, I care not, but it is the obvious accusation of New Thought theology, which in of itself, does not make any sense.
This ahs noting to do with the question addressed to you. The prosperity theology or it's root, New Thought, has nothing truthful about it, which is evident from their inception and what transpired, and their role in Babylon.
What does this have to do with the question addressed to you concerning the commission and the Trinity?
Everyone who came out of the Great Commission, be it they hold on to their Restorationist roots or not, adheres to it. The Commission itself is rooted in Matthew 28:16-20 and to the gospel being taught to the Nations, hence Matthew 24:14; Mark 13:13. The Commission is the instruction of the resurrected Jesus Christ to his disciples to spread the gospel to all the nations of the world, and as we see in Scripture, it was later entrusted to the church to continue this command. In regards to majority of Anti-Trinitarians, even that of the JWs, to them, although the general public agree/disagree with some of their notations, they recognize them for adhering to the Great Commission, such, even pointed out by the non-religious.
Going back to the first century, the Commission was held strongly, since Pentecost 33AD and onward, even in the face of Bishops. Restorationists, those that maintain said roots, do not have their own Commission. In fact, the Great Commission sits on the basis of Matthew 24:14 alone; even then, Restorationist of the 19th century didn't know everything, but they sought to learn despite their counterparts moving into the direction of Creeds.
That being said,  the Commission was addressed many times and what it signifies, even to you, at one point you even ignorantly brushed it off as a Unification Church.
Not really. Majority of threads speaks of JWs alone, rarely is there any topic of "core teachings" on the forums concerning who God is, and or of Scripture. The only one ever brought forth, you turned it into a JW thread when the focus should've been Scripture and what is conveyed.
Plus, history is rarely spoken of in terms of Christology alone.
This has nothing to do with the question addressed to you concerning their roots vs. the claim.
The question remains below:
If they're Prosperity Preachers as you said, what is the reason for Jehovah's Witnesses to be preachers let alone adhere to Commission and why they do not believe in the Trinity? 

That’s an excellent question. I like the parable of the Good Samaritan. When in doubt I believe it sets the best example that Jesus gave. Just replace man lying half dead on the street with gay person (Luke 10:25-37). Out of the priest and the Levite who shunned their neighbor, the Samaritan was the only one Jesus commended that didn’t shun his neighbor lying half dead on the street. He had mercy on the man, cared for him. Jesus never went onto say whether the beaten man was gay or straight, it didn’t matter, the Samaritan not only helped the injured man, he showed love for him regardless. That is the one who Jesus Christ said will inherit eternal life.
25 “On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
27 “He answered, “’Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’ and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
29 “But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” Luke 10:25-29
We all have gay neighbors.
“For the entire Law has been fulfilled in one commandment, namely: “You must love your neighbor as yourself.” Galatians 5:14
If we wish to inherit eternal life, we must love them.
Anything else and we would fulfill the prophecy of having no natural affection, shunning (2 Timothy 3:3). 

I think Homos should have the exact same civil rights under the law as everybody else does, but no more, and ignore them if they do not try to advocate their lifestyle to me. If they do, I start talking about HIV, and what Rock Hudson looked like before he died.
Talking to them about God is a complete waste of time.
If I had a Homo relative, I would have “normal” discussions if they initiated it, but not discuss anything of a Theocratic nature.
I have a natural advantage, as I snarl, easily. 

The difference between a child’s mind, and an adult’s mind is that an adult makes reasonable, practical judgements. 

@Alzasior Lutor Well this is something. Et bien c'est une surprise, quelqu'un qui parle francais. Mais comme je l'ai dit a l'autre gars. L'homosexualite est une mauvaise conduite, immorale. Bien que vous ne puissiez pas hair la personne (selon la culture et les gens) cela peut varier, cependant, la CONDUITE est mauvaise, detestable a Dieu. Et ce qui est mauvais, cette conduite, nous ne l'acceptons pas.
Le truc, c'est que les gens peuvent le voir, s'ils sont Temoins de Jehovah ou non. Le mariage homosexuel n'est pas vu sous un bon jour par la plupart.

What do those who know, who are well learned about history, say on question: Does the devil believe in the Trinity?

This is in regards to JW church burnings, not the historical church burnings of Canada pertaining to Indigenous peoples, children. The ongoing debate is outside of religious talk, more so on history, granted many people paint ALL Canadians as the bad guy regarding this.
 
That being said, the debate is historical based, mainly when you're dealing with Centrist.