by cupcakekourtney88 73 Replies latest jw friends
You posed your question incorrectly - it should be "Is it a cult?", as it is not a religion. Most religions actually give a damn about their members and don't treat them like sheep robots.
Most religions give a damn about their members? When did this happen?
Btw, welcome to the forum JDAWG.
-Sab
Most religions give a damn about their members
Actually, "most religions give a damn about their member$"
I see what you did there...
...then someone questions obedience and is put to death. This happens every so often. Perhaps it averages out to once in 900 trillion years.
This is precisely the concept I was attempting to convey. Perhaps I was unclear and I apologize. My response was to JonathanH's claim that
If man was meant to live forever and he had two choices, infinite time+finite choices=every choice will be made.
He then backpedals with
Given long enough somebody...
Actually, by his logic, given eternity "every choice will be made" would demand that everybody (not "somebody") would eventually be disobedient. My point is that his arbitrarily applying a simple statistical algorithm to a dichotomy (obedience/disobedience) would be nearly as faulty as applying a 50:50 chance to winning the lottery, since you either will or won't.
It's obvious from Scripture that some did, in fact, disobey God, even though perfect; both human and angelic. My belief is the only reason things were not handled immediately and individually is because it was such a vast rebellion and not an isolated incident. I fully expect some to fall away both in Heaven and on earth every so often, in the eternity after all things are made new.
JonathanH's statistical interpretation is just another way to make a dig at God - arguing God is a failure - in typical rabid atheist fashion. The blind lashing to elevate themselves at the expense of God, the name-calling, the snotty self-important comments, the LOLs and sarcasm contained in the posts of rabid atheist are very akin to the comments made by the cult members in the BBC documentary of Westboro Baptist Church I watched recently. They're condescending and insulting, thinly disguising their arrogant contempt behind terms like "Hon". I've discovered in my life, the more obnoxious someone is about their beliefs, the more likely their head is lodged firmly within the confines of their rectum.
It's possible Satan was a problem long before Eden and God was more patient and forgiving than I am giving him credit for, even toward perfect beings. Satan may have amassed a following of angels who were already becoming an issue. Perhaps stirring up rebellion in Eden was the last straw for Satan and having sex with women for the fallen angels. Perhaps some that were not with Satan's group suddenly jumped on the bandwagon of inter-creature sex, to the surprise of many among the Heavenly host. Maybe some of the angels who were with Satan viewed that as going too far and turned around. The Bible remains silent on this, so that would be purely conjecture, but JonathanH's comments imply that he has all the information required to be so completely confident in his understanding and statements that he can insult, belittle, and condescend to anyone with a differing viewpoint.
JDAWG-- How is it that they treat their members like your analogy-please clarify.
My apologies for being belittling but I am used to dealing with a religion that specifically instructs it's members to hate me "as david hated god's enemies", are openly willing to call me a fool seeing as how "There is no god so says the fool", and openly insist that I must not have a shred of morality sense I do not ascribe the bible's insane version of morality or human's very selective version of what the bible says morality is. My post that I copied was in response to a witness insisting that everyone here is an enemy of god that is going to be killed very very soon, and that we deserve it. Rabidness begets rabidness.
And you simply avoided answering anything by insisting that my statistical model is flawed. Even if it is my point still stands that god was already aware of the occurance because the probability favors it heavily, if not determines it inevitable. But as for my model, in Briane Green's newest book "hidden realities" in which he's discussing alternate realities in the face of a possibly infinite universe he points out what the actual finite number of possible particle configurations there are in our visible universe. It's something in the magnitude of ten to the tenth to the one hundred and twenty second (which is to say, take a 1, put 122 zeroes behind it, now take that number and put that many zeroes behind a 1, and that's the number of possible configurations) and that's how many different particle configurations there are in our part of the universe. If the universe is infinitely stretching out beyond what we can see, that means that every possible configuration exists somewhere, by definition they would have to. But if you don't need infinite space if you have infinite time, anything that is possible will happen given an infinite period of time, if it doesn't happen then by definition it's not possible. That doesn't mean a tree will sprout puppies given enough time, it might who know how trees would evolve given an infinite period of time, but the point is if it didn't sprout puppies given eternity, then it is not possible for it to sprout puppies.
If somebody has the ability to disobey god, and it's possible for them to do so, they will. It may take five hundred trillion years, but it would happen. If it didn't, then it couldn't be said to be possible. To say something is possible is to say that there is a chance of it happening, whatever probability that may be, it does have a certain probability of occuring. Given a long enough time line the probability of any event no matter how infinitesimal it may be becomes 1. If it does not occur then it cannot be said to have a chance of occuring, it had a zero probability of occuring. God had to know that mankind was going to disobey him. Which means his plan from the beginning was eventually to simply kill anything that disagreed with him, which is to say his form of free will was an illusion. Anything that chooses to disobey ceases to exist, which is to say nobody exists that disobeys him, meaning it is impossible for there to exist someone disobeying him. At least when his "plan" is complete.
But then there is the other things I brought up. Why is mass genocide preferable to a peaceful cultural victory? Wouldn't Pacifism, medicine, advanced agriculture, math and philosophy set his nation apart more than mass murder of civilians and children like every other barbaric ancient nation did? Is mass murder of dissenters ever a "good" solution, or merely a dictator's pragmatic solution?
Or how about the claim that god-beings are beyond comprehension or understanding, or criticism and how that makes any religious belief moot especially once they introduce deceptive god-beings? How could you ever show a religion to be true if there is a super intelligent creature out their that is actively attempting to deceive you? Any religion could be part of his trap, and you couldn't use reason or emotion to prove one over the other seeing as how he could easily trick you manipulating those very things. If reason and understanding are off the table, then Jehovah's Witnesses could be a trap to mislead set up by some devil, and you'd never know it. Given that it makes mass murder and even more arbitrary punishment.
To simply dismiss those as straw men is an attempt to avoid answering the questions, and neither of those had anything to do with statistics.
@JonathanH
To start with, most of us here have experience with that same religion of which you speak. Many of us have been on the receiving end of the fear/hate mongering you describe. Personally, I don't understand the attraction to a forum like this if for an atheist. I feel I can help soften the blows the Society has inflicted on some of the people here and repair some of the damage they do, in an attempt to prevent a few from throwing the baby (God) out with the bath water (religion). God isn't the one causing problems; people are. Contrary to popular atheist belief, if everyone was truly a Christian, the world would be a very pleasant place. There would be no violence, no hatred, no crime, etc. People falsely claiming to be Christian are causing problems.
I reject your model because it precludes free will. If there is no free will then all is fore-ordained and pointless; not to mention unscriptural. I'm not altogether sure I want to engage in a debate with someone who insists the Bible is ridiculous and rejects it as "insane", but has no problem with infinite universes. As soon as someone brings up string theory to combat theism, I pretty much realize I'm talking to a religious zealot who believes himself to be "scientific" and "logical". Same goes for conspiracy theorists.
To go point-by-point and unravel the tangle of half-truths, misunderstandings, and delusions of your understanding of the Bible according to your posts would take forever. And you've given no indication you're looking for answers, but just picking a fight. 10 years ago, I would have probably indulged you, but I've learned that it's pointless.
Once a man forms an opinion, he sees evidence for it everywhere he looks. - Abraham Lincoln
A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. - Simon and Garfunkel
I don't have the time, patience, or ability to convince everyone. Jesus himself only managed to convince a few (only number I can really find is 120 at Pentecost), even though thousands personally saw him perform miracles and heard him speak as no other man could.
No, you've worked too long and hard to convince yourself. (hehe... I said "long and hard") I can't even reason with JWs and we believe mostly the same things. Even using the Bible, which they claim to trust, I fail. The point at which I would have to start with you, when you've made it abundantly clear you've already decided, is far too much work with far too remote any chance for positive outcome. I'm just one guy. You've seen all the arguments for and against. You have access to the Bible to read for yourself.
The best information I can offer is this: Most theists are flaming morons and most of the arguments they make will be stupid and illogical. Making the logical leap from many stupid people claim belief in God to belief in God is stupid is your own fallacy.
Wontleave --- i enjoy reading your posts (interesting thread) and wish i had more time --- i'm assuming you're presently a JW? do you accept the memorial and believe only the annointed should partake of the emblems. Do you use/agree with their version of the Bible (NWT)? you indicated you feel the JW's are more accurately following Christ compared to other churches --- was this investigation extensive. an ex-jw friend of mine has recently returned to the JW religion, and i'm curious, other than the fact they do not accept the trinity.
@ LV101
I take issue with several things the Society decrees. I don't believe they teach anymore, so much as give orders. I believe the doctrine is still the most accurate (which isn't saying much, as most churches willfully spit on the Bible), but the Governing Body has taken a dirt road into blasphemous self-idolatry. There's a reason there are so many warnings about Pharisees in the Bible. Conversely, the "faithful and discreet slave" is briefly and casually mentioned, but the Society has formed their central doctrine around it. It's reminiscent of the snake handling churches who make a big deal out of a couple of spurious verses.
I use many Bible versions, but I have to agree with Jason Beduhn that most Bibles are very biased. One major problem with most of the Bible language "experts" is that they tend to be very theologically biased. Their religious beliefs are the catalyst to studying Bible languages in the first place. In keeping with human nature - rather than using what they learn about Hebrew, Koine, and Aramaic to shape their doctrine - their doctrine clouds their understanding of the languages. Add to that the fact that most studied the languages in a religious college.
Imagine studying in seminary school or Brigham Young University, especially being raised in the religion running the school. What you're taught would be so slanted it would take years to separate the facts from the propaganda. Not only that, but some trigger would have to begin the process of separation. Most here are familiar with wasting years on baseless arguments and, even with mountains of evidence against them, being very slow and cautious to drop them.
Just because someone has a PhD in a field doesn't remove their biases, either. If tobacco companies can scrounge up scientists to "prove" smoking is perfectly healthy, I'm sure something as emotionally-charged as religion is going to be much easier to find strict adherents to, even with years of education.
That being said, I see problems with the NWT. "Torture" stake? Sure, σταυρ?ς (stauros) didn't have to mean a cross, but every piece of research points to a cross of some sort. I lean toward a majuscule T shape. And what's with throwing in "torture"? I posted in another thread about the stake/cross subject. From my reading of the Bible and researching discussions of the Greek (nobody seems to argue much about the OT, even though it's 75% of the Bible), the Trinity is a false doctrine. There is an obvious hierarchy where the Son (lower title for a reason) is subservient to the Father (higher title for a reason). I believe the reason for the Trinity/Unity debate is that most "Christians" don't understand the Bible is chock full of gods - and not just blind, deaf statues. One god is the creator of all the other ones and demanded we worship and obey him exclusively. Then, thousands of years later, he includes his only-begotten in the equation and elevated him to a position he never had before and everybody's confused, because they're too busy trying to make the Bible fit their church doctrine to actually read what the book says.
So, I read everything scholarly I can find, understand what I can without being an expert in every possible field, run it through my mental filters, and do the best I can to piece the puzzle together. I gave the Qur'an a shot and it failed miserably. I researched Evolution thoroughly and I was really torn for a while. It was one of those things where the more I learned about it, the more I believed it - to a point. Then, the more I learned, the more I saw major holes and problems that a little knowledge in other fields would make red flags pop up.
Scientists are people too, prone to finding proof for their pet beliefs, just like everybody else. The deification of Evolutionist because they have degrees or wear lab coats is intellectually dishonest. I'm sure many of the church leaders who are spewing lies and slandering God are doing so with the best of intentions and clean consciences.
My relationship with the Witnesses is very rocky. I refuse to follow man-made rules and will not grant elders or the Society's articles power or authority over me. Elders have zero proof they are "appointed by Holy Spirit" and the Governing Body has zero proof they are the "faithful and discreet slave". I follow a strict Sola Scriptura philosophy and have no interest in the literature. This isn't understood or accepted by most Witnesses and they persecute me for it. But I'm a big boy and they have no real power, so it's more of a joke and a nuisance to me than any actual threat. Worst case scenario, they DF me for obeying Christ rather than men - for which I should (and will) rejoice - and a bunch of people I already can't stand will not talk to me anymore. I'm currently "marked" (I discovered in the elders' book) but still considered a member even though I'm treated as an outsider, an apostate, and a pariah. To them, I'm the mafia don they know is guilty but they can't make anything stick.
I do not believe those without a Heavenly hope should partake. The only ones present at the Last Supper were the 11 faithful apostles and their names are engraved in the foundation stones of Heaven. They will be changed in the twinkling of an eye at the last trumpet. I will not and have no desire to be. I like earthly things and am perfectly content right here, to be surrounded by perfect (hopefully naked) women. I have some theories about what Jesus meant when he said there would be no marriage in the New World; I guess we'll see. But I digress...
Seeing as only the anointed were present at the Last Supper, even though it seems Jesus had ~120 very faithful followers, I can't see any scriptural requirement or even suggestion for "other sheep" to attend. JWs only believe it would be disrespectful to Christ and his brothers to not attend because that's what they've been told by men with no evidence whatsoever.
I also don't believe every Christian from 33 to 1935 was anointed. I don't even believe most in the 1st century were anointed. That is an assumption by JWs, without basis. Meanwhile, everybody in every church takes communion, since they all believe they're going to Heaven. That makes no sense; Earth is our home, not a testing ground to determine our home. Those who go to Heaven are "bought from the earth". They are the exception, not the rule.
WOW - WONTLEAVE, sounds like you're in an enemy camp at the hall. i've questioned the memorial for yrs., but reasoned everyone attended to show their respect for Christ's sacrifice whether or not they partook and have considered the fact only the 12 were offered the emblems w/Christ but assumed it was an example for all to do if we accept him as our savior even though i don't participate in any religion that offers the emblems to participate.
Have a difficult time accepting the trinity doctrine and will try to find your posts w/respect to that subject. if God knows everything, why did he have to become a human to go thru and experience what mankind endures. i cannot understand and believe his son was his son, the Christ, but i'm trying desperately to keep an open mind.
thank you for your informative post -- i appreciate.
