Well, Elaine, the working of the Holy Spirit on my end tells me you have failed to learn my language; the language of reason. Your conclusions, therefore, are gibberish to me.
The Story of a Modern Famine - 1984 Ethiopia
by jgnat 47 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
myelaine
dear dgp...
this scripture suggests that God is intensely involved in the destiny of mankind and He wants mankind to be equally involved in the conclusion of that destiny. We all, together and individually, play a part in being accountable to God and each other in order to see benefit.
love michelle
-
myelaine
dear Janet...
what do you find unreasonable in what I've said?
love michelle
-
jgnat
You speak the language of the bible. In your worldview, if it is in the bible it must be so. Of course, you pick and choose. To speak to people of reason, you must use the language of reason.
-
myelaine
dear Janet...
I don't pick and choose willy nilly so much as lay precept upon precept.
you don't feel the need to warn anybody about something you don't choose to see, even though Jesus said it WAS so...I do feel the need to warn people about something I see AND Jesus said it WAS so...maybe this where you can comprehend that I do unto others as I would have them do unto me and you don't?
It is sincere concern and compassion coming from God poured out in me towards you. If it was no big deal why would I bother to act?...why did the prophets bother acting if it was no big deal?...why did Jesus bother telling us anything or even proclaiming His salvation and then following through with the action if it was no big deal? we all acted on what resonated with us as commands from God...it is known that the "things" concerning Him have a conclusion...it could be tonight. How can you "reason" through that and decide that I'm not using reason?...it's PERFECTLY reasonable to believe what Jesus says to be the truth...that is the foundation of my trust in Him!!...but maybe for you, not so much?!?!?
AND yeah, I do get my worldview from the bible...God does know the end from the beginning...and He saw to it that He didn't leave those who shared HIS worldview in the dark as to what is happening in that world regarding both celestial and terrestrial beings. ...He prepared a table before me, so to speak...I'm sure I don't have to apologise even if you regard it as "less than" your worldview in some way.
love michelle
-
jgnat
Paul at least had the courtesy to speak the language of his hearers. (Acts 17:16-34) Otherwise the words are clanging gongs and clashing cymbals (1 Corinthians 13:1). See, I can talk biblespeak.
-
myelaine
dear Janet...
you said: "Paul at least had the courtesy to speak the language of his hearers."...
ummm...you DID say that the Holy Spirit was working in you too 1 corinthians 2:10-13
love michelle
-
jgnat
Absolutely in me, Spirit and reason working alongside in perfect harmony. Now if your spirit direction is not speaking to mine, something is obviously missing. (1 Corinthians 14:18-40)
-
yadda yadda 2
This thread has unfortunately descended a bit into a two way tit-for-tat. Come on guys, focus on the big picture.
Anyway, Jgnat, political self-determination is indeed recognised as more or less a universal human right. You can see it in the United Nations charter at the UN's official website, for example. But as you allude to, the UN's charter also recognises that this right is relative; the charter recognises the equal right for member nations not to tolerate unwarraned aggression by a member nation that threatens the peace and security of other members and to take action to stop it.
This alone shows a weakness in the Jehovah's Witnesses claim that God has had to totally step back and do absolutely nothing to prevent the worst kinds of suffering. particularly since Christ's resurrection. If the imperfect human conscience utterly revolts against the worst and most outrageous injustice and suffering and depravity and is irresistibly moved to urgently stop the evil and suffering, then how could a superior holy God sit by and not be equally revolted and outraged and moved to action? It makes a mockery of what morality means.
But as I said, the theodicy that I posted for reconciling how an almighty and omniscient God of love can remain so hidden and allow so much needless suffering can be easily attacked. In fact, the point I just made about governmental, democratic self-determination as a right of all people itself raises serious questions about whether God in fact ever wanted to 'rule' over humanity at all, as Jehovah's Witnesses claim. One can say the human race has an inherent moral and universal democratic right to govern itself free from angelic or spirit creature involvement, control and interference. This raises questions about the genuine legitimacy of any mandate Jesus Christ would claim to have for ruling over mankind for 1,000 years no matter how great a job he might do, despite his sacrifice. The Christian response matches this objection though - Jesus does not rule all alone like a dictator who has no democratic mandate; he is one of 144,001 rulers, with 144,000 of them all drawn from imperfect humankind. So the universal right of self-government is not offended since humankind is being ruled over by humans.
The theodicy I posited can also be punctured through what we can say is the existence of universally acknowledged crimes against humanity, no matter what form of government or rulership is in power, and how that can be applied to the problem of evil. Some things are so unconscionably wrong and evil that only the rarest of humans who are seem bereft of normal conscience and moral faculty would accept them. There is an internal court of justice that adjudicates on such things, eg, war crimes. So my point is that there appears to be no rational reason for why God should have remained so hidden and non-interventionist in humans affairs as to feel he must so completely permit all the unbridled horror and suffering on such a massive scale over such a long period of time, since those things are universally and unquestionally regarded as evil. Since imperfect humans and their governments recognise such things are intrinsically wrong and undesirable and must be prevented by all means possible, then how could a rebellious angel in the garden of Eden have had any basis to a claim that God must be completely non-interventionist in human affairs and do nothing to prevent or mitigate the floodgates of evil and suffering that would ensue? How could there be any legitimate grounds for claiming that God must remain completely aloof and do nothing to prevent the worst kinds of suffering to the innocent for so many millennia?
It makes no sense. At the least we would have expected a personal God of lvoe to say to Satan "Ok, I will step back and you and humankind can have total self-determination but you must be prepared to reap with you sow; however, I reserve the right to prevent any depraved wickedness and unconscionable badness/evil that causes individual suffering and death to innocent adults and children that by any reasonable judgement has no bearing or affect upon humankinds right to indepedent governmental self-determination. Do you have any objection to that Satan?"
Satan would have had no legal or moral basis whatsoever for the same reasons no human of sane mind could ever possibly have any legitimate objection to any government or rulership employing a police force and justice system to protect the innocent and punish the wicked.
-
jgnat
Hi, Yadda. You honor me by swinging the topic back to where it belongs. I thought it was all forgotten.
About a nation's universal rights. Those rights do not allow a nation to do anything it wants to its people. I think at a fundamental level human rights must supercede. Just as the state will intervene in a family (a recognized unit of self-government) if a child is being abused.
"How could a superior holy God sit by and not be equally revolted and outraged and moved to action?" - most well put.
Whenever hubby suggests that mankind has faiiled to self-govern, bringing up similar injustices, I tell him I don't trust an elder to fix a pot-hole. It's not like the WTBTS is a model of harmonious self-government. It's clunky and oppressive!