Path....hey Path.....Yo, Path, don't you go dissin' waiting ya heah?
Waiting, how is our little TOL? I think I'll be needing a small refresher dose soon. Is it ready?
Adam and Eve
by Kristen 50 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
waiting
Well, ok, Path:
I've been enjoying this thread, but haven't yet spent the time exploring the issue. A good question Kristen and good replies. Thanks for your comments Frenchy.
I've made my questions and replies in this very hard, very touchy, thread, about the very essence of God, the literal or story-like necessity of a ransom, tests, sin, and deliverance - or lack thereof for all the foregoing, perhaps you have some thoughts you'd like to share with supporting scriptures?
With all due respect Waiting, all I was implying was that it would be nice to preserve the dignity I think at least this forum deserves.
Personally, after reading Frenchy's deep posts, and the Tale of Five Army Officers, I was ready for a break - and Seven led my way in.........
Always dangerous to bait a woman and then not expect her to respond.
waiting
-
Pathofthorns
You are the greatest Waiting. I concede to your superior experience and wisdom, and if not that, then to your beauty. (That is what they all say, isn't it?)
"I'm not saying I'm bigger than Jesus or better than Jesus, I was just saying.. " (lol)
Path
-
waiting
Hello Frenchy,
In order for free will (freedom) to exist it would have to do so without direct interference from him. That means allowing you the choice.
The Choice: If you obey me - you live. If you disobey me - you die, cease to exist, go to hell, etc.
God & the Child:
A small child is in no position to pass judgments on the actions and decisions of its parents. We are in a comparable position with God.
Does God view us as children, with Free Choice to love/not love, obey/not obey - which is an adult capability because these concepts (when dealing with our lives & families lives) are adult concepts.
Then, when we question/doubt, suggest that we are children not capable of understanding? And then give us answers (perhaps) which are shrouded in ambiguity and misconceptions which he expects us to decipher, and put deep meaning to?
On the one hand, we are told we have Free Choice - but if we don't choose his choice, we die or are killed by God.
On the other hand, if we use our Free Choice and question "stuff", we are told that his ways are higher than our ways. No problem with that thought, it's an obvious one. But what's the good of Free Choice if we can't question?
But why give Free Choice if it's not an equal choice? I can accept candy (Paradise) or poison (Death). Some Free Choice.
My dad used to make me stand in the corner as a kid. When he decided it was a long enough punishment, he would ask me if I had had enough and wanted to get out. If I wanted out of that corner, I would have to kiss him and say I was sorry and that we were friends again.
I hated, with a passion, to do that. I was still mad and wanted to tell him so. I absolutely did not want to be his friend. It was my free choice: I could tell him the truth - and go back to that stupid corner for another hour, or I could lie, kiss him, and go play. Free Choice? No, I played his game by his rules.
waiting
-
Zep
The Choice: If you obey me - you live. If you disobey me - you die, cease to exist, go to hell, etc.
Might makes right Waiting.Thats the nature of the universe...the ability to enforce your morality upon others!, its the tale of human history.
'Free will' is a bit of a misnomer, i reckon.Who is truely free in mind anyway.The bible says we are all born sinners...but if free will were a fact then how could that be true.If we truely had free will then we would be able to do God's will without question and be perfect like Jesus.But its impossible, so we are told , to measure up to Gods standards...but if we truely had freewill this would be no problem.Truth is We are all victims of our Genetic limitations and enviorment to a degree...our choices are limited by these factors!.
-
Seven
Zep, God wanted people who were free to commit sin to choose to love and obey him instead. Adam and Eve were brought into this world as adults. No
childhood learning by trial and error. No benefiting from their past mistakes. No school of hard knocks. No big surprise that they accepted the bad advice of a skilled Adversary who made things look so attractive that nothing would do until they had it. The end result was death.
We do have free will, even to make excuses for our failures. God knows we cannot achieve perfection but he expects us to make the effort.
seven -
Zep
Yeah, there is a certain degree of freedom in choice, i'll agree Seven...I dont mean to make excuses for peoples actions!
Adam and Eve were brought into this world as adults.
Yeah, but how adult/mature can you be if you think a Snake can talk?
-
waiting
Hey Zep,
Yeah, but how adult/mature can you be if you think a Snake can talk?
Another seeming paradox to the A&E account, eh?
Free Will - as long as you do it my way.
Adult perfect reasoning ability - eat from the Tree of Knowledge - have you eyes opened. Eat from the Tree of Life - live forever. Talk to a Snake, get insight from him.
I think I finally got my head around what irked me about this Free Choice discussion - The WTBTS uses the very same concept with it's followers:
We do not shun former members who simply cease to be active. (not exact quote - but close) Very open, very fair looking statement.
Concept - Members can leave anytime they want. This is not a cult. As long as you don't mind being viewed by family and friends as an anti-christ, hated by God, worthy of everlasting death.
And btw, the WTBTS doesn't put restraints on their members freedom of choice - they just strongly "encourage" everyone you know never to speak to you as long as you live. But their members are free to choose if they want to stay.
God - You can love/obey me and live. Not love/obey and die (or concept of burning in hell forever comes in also.)
WTBTS - You can come or leave - the choice is yours. If you stay - you'll be happy & secure. If you leave - we'll teach all jw's to never speak to you again.
But we as jw's have the same type freedom of choice that God gives. Why do you think that so many jw's try to "quietly slink" away? They don't want to be branded and they want to keep the family/friends who they care about.
On not understanding the "God's higher mentality concept"- God and WTBTS teach the same thing - just go along with it - it's for your own good. Close your eyes, and don't openly question or doubt and have an assured hope, which is a strong foundation, for eternal life on earth.
God, in A&E account, wanted obedience from A&E - not necessarily love.
WTBTS wants our obedience: (The Walsh Trial court Transcripts, HG Covington)
Q. If a member of Jehovah's Witnesses took the view himself that the prophecy was wrong and said so he would be disfellowshipped?
A. Yes, if he said so and kept persisting in creating troubles, because if the whole organization believes one thing, even though it be erroneous, and somebody else starts on his own trying to put his ideas across, then there is disunity and trouble, there cannot be harmony, there cannot be marching...Our purpose is to have unity.
Q. Unity at all costs?
A. Unity at all costs...
Q. And unity based upon an enforced acceptance of false prophecy?
A. That is conceded to be true.An enforced acceptance is not freedom of choice. It is a force no matter what you call it.
The Tale of Five Officers
In a long discussion on h2o, an additional view to the five was presented showing, perhaps, God's thinking. God created thinking and reality - therefore, he obviously can view it the way he wishes. We, as children in concepts, may not understand his thinking. That really does not matter.
In the story, the woman is savagely raped and killed. Perhaps there was another meaning to that? Perhpas God, in his highness, does not view rape as rape, killing as killing. Perhaps he calls it another, higher in thinking, name. Like.....testing the woman. Like.....teaching the killer concepts. Like.......disciplining the woman. Like....letting her prove her love to God.
Sure sounds like the concept of No matter what you call a rose, it still smells like a rose. Based upon Shakespeare.
Well, congratulate me! I've thoroughly confused myself, once again.
waiting
Edited by - waiting on 23 August 2000 7:50:7
-
Zep
Try this for confusing Waiting.
Have the adherents of the theory of free will the right to punish?-People who judge and judge as a profession try to establish in each case whether an ill-doer is at all accountable for his deed, whether he was able to employ his intelligence, whether he acted for reasons and not unconsciously or under compulsion.If he is punished, he is punished for having preferred the worse reasons to the better: which he must therefore have known.Where this knowledge is lacking a man is, according to the prevailing view, unfree and not responsible: except if his lack of knowledge, his ignorance for example, is a result of an intentional neglect to learn; in which case, when he failed to learn what he should have learned he had already preferred the worse reasons to the better and must now suffer the consequences of this bad choice.If, on the other hand, he did not see the better reasons, perhaps from dull-wittedness or weakness of mind, it is not usual to punish him: he lacked, one says, the capacity to choose, he acted as an animal would.For an offence to be punishable presupposes that its perpetrator intentionally acted contrary to the better dictates of his intelligence.But how can anyone intentionally be less intelligent than he has to be?.Whence comes the decision when the scales are weighed with good and bad motives? Not from error, from blindness, not from an external nor from an internal compulsion?(consider, moreover, that every so-called 'external compulsion' is nothing more than the internal compulsion of fear and pain.)Whence? one asks again and again.The intelligence is not the cause, because it could not decide against the better reasons? And here one calls 'free will' to one's aid: it is pure willfulness which is supposed to decide, an impulse is supposed to enter within which motive plays no part, in which the deed, arising out of nothing, occurs as a miracle.It is this supposed wilfulness, in a case in which wilfulness ought not to reign, which is punished: the rational intelligence, which knows law, prohibition and command, ought to have permitted no choice, and to have had the effect of compulsion and a higher power.Thus the offender is punished because he employs 'free will', that is to say, because he acted without a reason where he ought to have acted in accordance with reasons.Why did he do this? But it is precisely this question that can no longer be asked: it was a deed without a 'for this reason', without motive, without origin, something purposeless and non-rational.-But such a deed too ought, in accordance with the the first condition of punishability laid down above, not be punished!.It is not as if something had not bee done here, something ommitted, the intelligence had not been employed: for the omission is under all circumstances unintentional and only the intentional omission to perform what the law commands counts as punishable.The offender certainly preferred the worse reasons to the better, but without reason or intention: he certainly failed to employ his intelligence, but not for the purpose of not employing it.The presupposition that for an offence to be punishable its perpetrator must have intentionally acted contrary to his intelligence- it is precisely this presupposition which is annulled by the assumption of 'free will'.You adherents of the theory of 'free will' have no right to punish, your own principals deny you that right...
F.Nietzsche
-
waiting
Wellforpete'ssakeZep!!!!
After all that - and no opinion???????
I have printed it out - can't read stuff like that without a yellow marker and hot coffee.
You quote Nietzsche often. What book? Interesting & confusing.
waiting