by dustin_adam 27 Replies latest watchtower bible
I suppose it depends what you think perfect really means:
And the LORD was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.
God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.
When a man does not admit any error we think of him rather badly, rather than 'perfect' - the jw idea of 'perfect' is a very warped idealism, reflecting the stupid arrogant behaviour also.
" perfect " probably, and especially in the JW setting is generally applied in contrast to being 'imperfect' with respect to the condition of morphology of the human state after Adam sinned
Oops, sorry. I really had "morbidity" in mind rather than morphology.
But the "condition of the morphology of the human state after Adam sinned" is conditional since that morphology did change after Adam sinned. But I won't defend the poor use of that term here since, indeed, I had "morbidity" in mind, even though that's a general term as well.
Thus increased "morbidity" and changed "morphology" are associated with "imperfection" rather than a morphologically perfect human specimen with an absence of morbidity.
But the true question is, before we get too sidetracked by the dictionary and specific definition, is whether or not you understand how the USAGE by the witnesses of "perfect" in this context is applied. That is, they don't mean "unable to sin" or that certain deliberate sins are unconnected with being "perfect" as the angels are perfect and morphologically sound, whereas post-fall children of Adam are morphologically impaired and inferior.
It's interesting though, to finalize where you're going with this that god "regretted" he had made man and all that. He on another occasion suggested that he would just as soon wipe it all out, suggesting that he exercised some PATIENCE and restraint in order to save the innocent and beautiful of Adam's children, those who would respond to fulfill God's intended purpose.
This introduces a sub-theme, however, of how God is dealing with this. He basically sent his son to do the best he could and then whatever he saved was HIS, thus God gave EVERYTHING to the Christ, both in Heaven and Earth.
Thus from our reference, we should understand that God is REALLY PIS____ED!! Far more than you realize. And that he's using an INTENSE AMOUNT OF RESTRAINT to hold off destroying everything and starting over. That's why those people who think they can dally around the line are going to be disappionted. You can't be just near the line or with one foot on the line. You have to be on the line, facing East with your head to the ground. If your standing on the line and facing the wrong direction you're probably going to get your head cut off, along the most of the rest of your body at the knees.
Christ comes to help the noble and meek of mankind to get into that prostate position for their own sake to try to save their lives. For those who listen, they might get saved. For those who keep standing and asking stupid questions, well.... Hmmm. What can I say? If there's somethingin this world you have wanted to see all your life but haven't...uh....this is the time to make sure you do so. hint-hint.....
"BUT IT NOW, NO GUARANTEE THE STORE WILL BE OPENED TOMORROW!"
JC
Perfection as "complete" or "whole" makes far more sense.
Is it possible for us to be "complete" once we have "connected" with our maker?
IMHO it is, though the finished work is yet at hand.
It's a far cry from JW doctrine, though.
For those who keep standing and asking stupid questions, well.... Hmmm. What can I say? If there's somethingin this world you have wanted to see all your life but haven't...uh....this is the time to make sure you do so. hint-hint.....
Alright, i agree... as you said in the beginning of your reply let's not get side-tracked with definitions and contexts, what do you want to say?... something in this world i've wanted to see all my life?....i'm not even going to begin to conjecture what you're talking about with that one...
What angers me about your replies is not what you said but mostly your ending to them... ie. "Gods way is always best" and "hint-hint", don't preach at me, i've been preached at by JW's my entire life... and the result? I'm a gay atheist, I'm happy as such... far more content than I EVER was as a Jehovah's Witness, the JW doctrine has ripped my family to shreds, put me in the hospital with a nervous breakdown and nearly caused me to commit suicide on a number of different occasions, I'm far too routine, organised and logical a person to have running as my belief system something as shaky as the doctrine of an organised religion.
I welcome comments but try to refrain from using pseudo-scientific terms and undefended arguments. If you'd like to put the dictionary aside, fine, i'll bite, but I'd ask that you at least make references to your statements from scripture, I'd like to study your claims.
Also, I wish to post an official appology for any comments made in bad taste or anger, I regret the fact that I posted any at all through the veil of negative emotion, none of them are intended to be personal in any way.
Dustin
uggg........toss the Bible out as being prophetic and chalk it up to being nothing more than a standard or guide in story book form for us to learn from. Thats what I did and now my brain doesn't hurt so much from trying to figure it all out.
Kate
I'm far too routine, organised and logical a person to have running as my belief system something as shaky as the doctrine of an organised religion.
Sorry for sounding too "preachy" but that's my take on things. I'm just like you. I had a bad reaction to the hypocrisy of the JW org, I'm very logical and scientific, only I went into an entirely different direction, seeking the logical and scientific bases for things in the Bible, not the miracles or the flood, but historical. But I'm on your side about "organized religion"; they don't have it.
But about being "logical" and all and being subjective. I've always mused at atheists since the only reason they are likely atheists is that they are the "seeing is believing" sort. They want something hard and concrete before they just accept some miscellaneous fantasy in a book. BUT, if an angel (or what you believed to be an angel) ever appeared to you and did a few angelic maneuvers, then suddenly you'd be a believer, but only because you had a logical reason to believe--the personal experience.
Well I'm glad you found a nice space, psychologically. That's important. I've gone through my changes and trauma as well and getting through it is important and good. I like your topics, though; they're reasonable questions.
JC
well... seems we reached a common ground... I can appreciate a scientific look at the bible, but I must also make the argument that everybody processes information in a different manner, "reality" is differen't for everyone, how I understand a concept and how you understand a concept are very different, or, at the very least, have the potential to be. From how I understand my surroundings Evolution makes more sense than creation, maybe I'm wrong, maybe not. But even still, God is a theory, no matter how much you believe it with all your heart, God is still a theory, if The God Theory was 100% verifiable, I wouldn't be an athiest, and therein Evolution isn't 100% verifiable, no matter that I completely believe it, it's still a theory.
Your right, if I saw an angel I might indeed think differently, But I would also be forced to accept the possibility that I was hallucinating, unless of course the experience was shared mutually with a second party, at which point I would have to accept the experience.
Theres a second point I never could understand: I've been told this by many people, and, now including yourself that athiests are a "must see it to believe it" lot... and, LOL, frankly I don't see the flaw in that at all, what is wrong with waiting for verification on a point through research? so many people I've run across who believe in God get downright offended (and i'm not saying you did at all) by the fact that I don't share their "faith" that there is a "God".
I don't have a problem with a belief in God, just the organisations that take advantage of that belief. There is an exceedingly big difference in the statements "Gods way is the only way" and "I believe God's way is the only way", the former pisses me off, the second I can live with. I never discuss the details of my beliefs except with other Athiests, which is exceedinly rare. Mostly it's because I'm comfortable with them, I don't need validation, I nave no desire to project my beliefs to those around me, their mine, and that should suffice.
I feel often that a lot of people miss the mark, (and myself as well, no matter how well-meaning I am) that the real question is not one of faith, or science or the Bible, but of Ethics.
Ethics are fantastic tools, and they can be utilized by anyone, regardless of religious belief, background, etc etc. Thye are in my view the principles that govern balanced living, the interactions that keep society in individuals running smoothly. Ethics don't require the Bible, I don't need to believe in God or give up my desire for scientific verification in order to be a good guy. (Or at least strive to be, I don't always get it right)
Dustin
But even still, God is a theory, no matter how much you believe it with all your heart, God is still a theory
For yourself, as you seem to have processed, or indeed experienced
but I must also make the argument that everybody processes information in a different manner, "reality" is differen't for everyone, how I understand a concept and how you understand a concept are very different
Good to hear
