Does the account of Job and keeping your eye on the prize contradict?
by creativhoney 22 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
creativhoney
oops I hate it when that happens. - The issue was that humans only serve God for the reward. - Job proved otherwise allegedly. the whole belief system of JWs is the New System (hijacked from another thread there) - and 'keep your eyes on the prize' - I wonder how many would lead self sacrificing lives if the prize were taken away. - although Jobs account was often mentioned as a matter of integrity, this question I have never heard pose in a KH.. If there were no New System, and no prize.. would you still be a JW, or would you choose a more lenient religion?
-
Awen
I posed that very question to myself many years ago with Job in mind and came to the conclusion (after study and being involved in many religious paths) that yes, I would serve God even if there wasn't a reward at the end. Simply because, his rules (Laws) for living cause me great happiness/contentment and I enjoy those things now. The reward is simply icing on the cake.
-
creativhoney
Awen, but would you do it in such a manner as the JWs?
-
Awen
I had this attitude while I was a JW and shared it with many people who agreed with me. If these things are done out of selfishness, then God knows it and there is no rewad. Jesus gave a parable of a man with 2 sons whom he asked to work in his field. His first son agreed to work in the field but then changed his mind. The second son said he wouldn't work, but then felt regret and worked in the field. Jesus then posed the question, "Who really loved his father?"
The answer is the son who initially didn't want to work, but felt regret and because of his love for his father went out into the field.
So I went door to door (which I hated) and gave talks (which I enjoyed) and other things. The things I loved I did willfully and the things I hated I did because I loved God more than myself, which is the point Jesus was trying to get across.
-
Tuesday
I argue this quite frequently that Job is testimony that God was absolutely, unequivocally wrong. Just because the bible SAYS that God deemed him as serving selflessly doesn't mean he was. Human psychology is an interesting subject. I would argue that Job was rewarded before and felt that he was still on the right path even though he was being punished, therefore he felt he would be rewarded once again. On top of that serving God could've become and internal motivation that it made him feel good that he was sticking to his principles, it made him feel good that he THOUGHT he was making God feel good in serving him without a reward. On top of that God spoke to Job specifically to say he was on the right path, in turn he had external motivation essentially verifying that he was right in his ideals. Finally he also could've feared the consequences of turning his back on God, after receiving such reward for faithful service Job would feel the opposite would occur (or continue to occur) if he turned his back on God.
Job is the worst example I can think of when someone is trying to prove that people can serve God selflessly. I actually made a video to someone arguing this point to me;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQToDyJD3xY -
Awen
Your mocking attitude in the video shows me that your mind is made up on this subject, no matter what counter-argument is made. Your insults levied at those who do not possess (in your opinion) the same grammatical or literary skills as yourself show a self-righteous attitude and an unwillingness to be open to other opinions. An opinion is a theory based upon personal experience and observations concerning the world around us. An opinion is only Truth to the one who holds the viewpoint. It may be anathema to others. So be it.
As to your reference to "Thankyou or Thank you" and how it's properly spelled and or used in english, and your mocking tone towards others in your assumption of their incorrect useage.
See this webpage:
http://future-perfect.co.uk/grammartips/grammar-tip-thank-you-thankyou.asp
As to the whys and wherefores of why I serve God:
If I say I serve God unselfishly, that should be enough for you. IMO, it's not for you to determine what is or is not selfish. When you try to do this you put yourself in the position of the WTS. You judge others when you should only worry about yourself.
But I will explain some things I have seen and learned and if I or others had followed God's laws in the first place, they wouldn't have so many troubles. Not having sex before marriage would greatly reduce the percentage of unwed, single mothers. STD's wouldn't be so rampant if people waited for marriage. They would only be passed thru the offspring and the STD's could be treated more effectively. Just two examples out of many, but enough for me to reason out for myself that if I follow Gods law which he has handed down thru the ages, I will prosper. So I give back to God in appreciation for the things he gave me freely. I can choose to do or not to do. I choose to do these things because love, real love motivates me to do so. I can only ascertain that you have not felt this type of love for God or anyone else, hence your mocking tone and holier than thou attitude on your vid.
Your video reminded me so much of those annoying infomercials on late at night that have people screaming at the camera for others to buy their product. As if having a raised voice will convince others that you are correct because you are seemingly so excited about your product. It also reminds me of talk shows host Morten Downey Jr, who did much of the same thing.
-
Tuesday
Awen,
You certainly know how to make ad hominem attacks but you certainly do not know how to make a convincing argument. Let's take a look at your post...
Your mocking attitude in the video shows me that your mind is made up on this subject, no matter what counter-argument is made. Your insults levied at those who do not possess (in your opinion) the same grammatical or literary skills as yourself show a self-righteous attitude and an unwillingness to be open to other opinions. An opinion is a theory based upon personal experience and observations concerning the world around us. An opinion is only Truth to the one who holds the viewpoint. It may be anathema to others. So be it.
This is one long ad hominem attack to reduce the credibility of my argument, you however do not actually deal with a single issue that I raise in the video you'd rather just insult and hope that people don't notice you didn't actually say anything. The literary skills and grammatical corrections are a pet peeve of mine I have a Bachelor's degree in English.
Your thank you article says when you refer to the phrase "Thank You" as an article you CAN put it into one word. However when quoting someone as a phrase it is never in one word. In fact I would even question the one word set up in a noun sense as I would say at the very least there should be a hyphen between it (thank-you).
If I say I serve God unselfishly, that should be enough for you. IMO, it's not for you to determine what is or is not selfish. When you try to do this you put yourself in the position of the WTS. You judge others when you should only worry about yourself.
No simply saying you're doing something selflessly does not make it so. My argument is that one cannot serve God selflessly, I can show this in the base emotion of every service you perform for God. This is basic psychology, it's all reactionary for what you can get out of it. If someone tells you're they're not lying about something is that always enough for you? Especially if you know they are lying? In this case I am saying, and I will say it in your case as well. You do not serve God selflessly, as I say in the video; you are serving for internal satisfaction, external reward and external fear of death. The putting myself in the WTS position, since this is a board made up of ex-JWs what you're trying to do here is guilt by association. You're creating a false correlation between the Watchtower Society and me in order to again destroy credibility in my argument. Of course not with an actual point, the only actual addressing of my points in the video is saying "I serve God selflessly" stated as a fact with no backing facts behind it to prove it. Just making a blanket statement and stating it is true does not make it so. If you want to try and correlate things with the WTS I would say look no further than yourself, they are famous for stating things as fact without a shred of evidence to back it up. I'm not correlating you with the WTS, I figured I'd point that out because it's a cheap argument.
But I will explain some things I have seen and learned and if I or others had followed God's laws in the first place, they wouldn't have so many troubles. Not having sex before marriage would greatly reduce the percentage of unwed, single mothers. STD's wouldn't be so rampant if people waited for marriage. They would only be passed thru the offspring and the STD's could be treated more effectively. Just two examples out of many, but enough for me to reason out for myself that if I follow Gods law which he has handed down thru the ages, I will prosper. So I give back to God in appreciation for the things he gave me freely. I can choose to do or not to do. I choose to do these things because love, real love motivates me to do so. I can only ascertain that you have not felt this type of love for God or anyone else, hence your mocking tone and holier than thou attitude on your vid.
Here's the meat of your argument and it shows completely you do not serve God selflessly. In this case you're following his laws because you see benefit to them. Then your "giving back in appreciation" is actually your internal motivation, it makes you feel good to reciprocate the good things you feel God gave you. No doubt you feel that you are making God happy by showing appreciation. Your final sentence is just another ad hominem attack, is this how you discuss things with people who disagree with you, just attack, attack, attack. "I choose to do these things because love, real love motivates me to do so." Don't make me laugh, the only reason you cannot analyze love deeper is because you refuse to, look at love a bit deeper. Ask yourself why you feel the way you do, what you get out of it, why you're showing love to the other person. Love is a complex emotion that has several aspects to it, Love is not a singular emotion that cannot be broken down into parts.
Your video reminded me so much of those annoying infomercials on late at night that have people screaming at the camera for others to buy their product. As if having a raised voice will convince others that you are correct because you are seemingly so excited about your product. It also reminds me of talk shows host Morten Downey Jr, who did much of the same thing.
Another ad hominem attack trying to correlate me to things that annoy you and other things as if I'm trying to sell something, thereby destroying my credibility without of course actually addressing the points. If you want to discuss what I posted, then actually discuss it, discuss the things in and come up with an actual counter-argument. It's ridiculous that I have to sift through a barrell of ad hominem attacks because someone disagrees with my viewpoint and can't separate their emotions from their logic. They say that ad hominem attacks are the last ditch effort of someone without a leg to stand on, given your actual arguments in addressing this point I can see why you resorted to them.
-
Awen
Perhaps you would be so kind as to post another video that is much clearer (without the mocking tone and references to how other people express themselves) so that a an ignorant person such as myself can understand it. Perhaps a point by point discussion without all the unneccessary references to other's grammar or lack thereof. I found it quite difficult to keep myself focused upon what you were actually saying.
My point in "attacking your credibility" as you put it was to see how you would react. You attacked back. Your comments and they way you expressed towards others in your video shows the exact same thing that I did. I mocked you and attacked your credibility without giving one wit of information as to why I felt the way I did, same thing you did. You simply dismissed them out of hand as being unable to challenge you because they were "dumb". When addressing a particular issue your tone would be sarcastic or mocking towards those who had responded. Personally I do not believe that any argument anyone puts forth will be viewed as valid, for the overall tone of the video seems to indicate your mind has already been made up. Referencing Job, when Satan made his accusations, the text seemed to indicate much of the same sarcastic tone and after it was all said and done, Satan was nowhere to be seen or heard from. Now don't think I am equating you with Satan, he is far beyond your limited expertise.
In your video you told others they were in essence out right wrong or misinformed, I think the word "delusional" was used. Perhaps you can post your Psychiatric Degree information here, the college you went to, when you received your degree which qualifies you to make such a statement. I will go out on a limb here and guess that you have no such degree but still feel qualified to make such sweeping claims about another person's mental state. Perhaps you slept at a Holiday Inn last night and so you feel this qualifies you? Hmm?
-
Tuesday
Perhaps you would be so kind as to post another video that is much clearer (without the mocking tone and references to how other people express themselves) so that a an ignorant person such as myself can understand it. Perhaps a point by point discussion without all the unneccessary references to other's grammar or lack thereof. I found it quite difficult to keep myself focused upon what you were actually saying.
I posted a video discussing which I had already made regarding the subject, you want me to cater to your whims because? On youtube you can post a video response, if you would like me to make a video specifically addressing you based on this video then make a video response to this video. I will gladly make a video response directly to you so that you can understand it.
My point in "attacking your credibility" as you put it was to see how you would react. You attacked back. Your comments and they way you expressed towards others in your video shows the exact same thing that I did. I mocked you and attacked your credibility without giving one wit of information as to why I felt the way I did, same thing you did. You simply dismissed them out of hand as being unable to challenge you because they were "dumb". When addressing a particular issue your tone would be sarcastic or mocking towards those who had responded. Personally I do not believe that any argument anyone puts forth will be viewed as valid, for the overall tone of the video seems to indicate your mind has already been made up. Referencing Job, when Satan made his accusations, the text seemed to indicate much of the same sarcastic tone and after it was all said and done, Satan was nowhere to be seen or heard from. Now don't think I am equating you with Satan, he is far beyond your limited expertise.
Attacking you? You mean pointing out that you're using logical fallacies? Yup, that's what I did. Can you point out anywhere in my post where I come even close to the ad hominem attacks that you have put forth in either one of your posts? In my video I addressed every single post by this user and I also mentioned why their posts proved my point. Did you actually watch the video? I explained in the video quite clearly why every reason for serving God would be an internal motivation or an external motivation to ultimately get something out of the relationship.
In your video you told others they were in essence out right wrong or misinformed, I think the word "delusional" was used. Perhaps you can post your Psychiatric Degree information here, the college you went to, when you received your degree which qualifies you to make such a statement. I will go out on a limb here and guess that you have no such degree but still feel qualified to make such sweeping claims about another person's mental state. Perhaps you slept at a Holiday Inn last night and so you feel this qualifies you? Hmm?
My Associates degree was in liberal arts with a concentration on psychology. It was from CCRI and I received my Associates in 2000. I moved on to Roger Williams University where I received a Bachelor's in English with a minor in Biology in 2002. I'll actually be attending URI's doctorate in Pharmacy if it's any interest to you. The word dilusional was not used, I did say that I was speaking over their head because I feel otherwise they would not have used examples that so feed into my argument.
As for you, this is the second post where you've failed to address a single point I've made either in my previous post or my initial post with the video. Are you planning on actually discussing the point or are you just looking to turn this into a discussion about me?