Posts by menrov

13

The rich will not inherit the Kingdom of God—Did Jesus really say this?

by anointed1 in

it is our experience that love of money brings action towards accumulating abundance of wealth which ultimately convinces the owner that “i was wasting my time” which in turn motivates him to turn into philanthropy (like bill gates and co did).

this is a perfect design (designed to work independently of god) like a journey of which the first half is wasteful and the second half is fruitful, and it is to be viewed as a whole.

hence it is unlikely that jesus would say: “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of god.” (mathew 19:24) verse is obviously attributed to jesus by later writers.. this means question of morality is not complicated if viewed as a whole process.

menrov

TOR1500: or is it Truly I say to you TODAY :-)

Anyway, if something is difficult, it does not mean that it is not possible or that by definition they will not inherit. The point is that being rich (like many leading Jews at the time, looking down on the poor for which they did nothing) is by no means their ticket to paradise. In fact, it will likely be more difficult for them as they (the rich Jewish leaders) lack the love and compassion for others, the weak, the meek (Matt. 5).

But of course, the leaders of the WBTS, who pretend to be poor but live like very wealthy people without spending one penny on the poor or meek or sick, do not want its members to become rich according to their definition. Because money gives some independence, and that is something they hate.

210

Morality Without Deity

by cofty in

one of the most persistent arguments for belief in god centres on the necessity of an ultimate law-giver and epitome of goodness.. a softer version is seen in the genuine concern that a loss of faith will result in a corresponding loss of a moral compass - a more strident argument links the existence of good and evil with proof of the reality of god.

it is often asserted that without god, moral decisions degenerate to nothing more than personal preferences and the victory of "might is right".. i want to succinctly lay out my response as an atheist, and show that a supreme being is not required for objective morality.. it is helpful to distinguish between absolute morality, objective morality and subjective morality.

christian apologists frequently conflate the first two, and secular debaters often fail to point out the difference.. theists who disagree on everything else, are unanimous that god is perfectly good.

menrov

I have not read all the comments yet. But I do see that if one leaves a rather controlling religious group because of the false claims or even lies and bad things happening in that group, that person runs the risk to lose all faith in a god. And if that happens, also the believe in the bible is gone. Now, where to go for your moral compass? Eventually, the person either regains some faith again in a god or accepts his own views and conscience to be his moral compass. Whichever the final result, there will be a period in which that person lives in a sort of a vacuum. For many, a very uncomforting situation.

People will say: you see, that is what happens if you leave us (religious organisation) or when you lose faith in god. And meaning that the person is worse off than before. For a moment, that can be true, but it is a phase.

There are many human groups that do not have access to a Christian bible and use other sources to define their moral compass. Are these societies worse off than those that are more based on bible principles? I believe that history shows that it does not really make a big difference. Is a Chinese person a worse person than a person from a western (Christian) based country?

What makes life difficult for humans is being ruled by people who love power and are willing to use everything to gain that power. People being ruled by such people will adjust their views on what is right or wrong to some extend.

Anyway, just my view.

70

Pseudo history in Watchtower today 😂

by Gorbatchov in

jw
friends

gorby went to the kh for family reasons today.. and landed right away middle in a pseudo history watchtower article.

just that aspect of the jw belief he is so sensative about.. so 1918 and 1919 are changed with one mark of a pencil.

the argument of change was in the past the argument of the doctrine.

menrov

I wonder why the WBTS decide to revisit these old doctrines. What is the added value of doing this? They run the risk that more JW's get confused and leave. And I do not see how these revised or clarified old doctrines increase the faith of the readers.

The only reason I can think of is that influential people around or closer to the gb members are sometimes raising issues (inconsistencies) with these old doctrines. Why else would they bother? Who in todays congregation is ever interested about what happened then, with Russell and Rutherford.....

Any ideas?

11

Jehovah's Witnesses charity drops attempts to block abuse inquiry

by NikL in

guardian this morning.... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/23/jehovahs-witnesses-charity-drops-attempts-to-block-abuse-inquiry

menrov

Crazyguy, as I read it, it means that the commission is not demanding anymore that the WBTS provides all documents. Which could mean that WBTS will only submit selected (screened) documents and not all. The article does not give the reason for the decision by the commission to drop the production order.

18

JW.org as a Prank Tool

by schnell in

jw
friends

the moment i saw the "request a study" form on the site, i thought, "umm, that could be a bad thing.".

but to date, i have heard of only one case where it was used for less than genuine purposes.

that was in the case of a "game developer" who was selling crappy asset-flips on steam.

menrov

was still counted as a revisit :-)

65

Short stay

by midnight in

after much research and prayer i am returning to being a jehovah's witness i can find nothing that eliminates them from being god's directed people , in the end they will reach the end of there journey despite mistakes and errors just like the israelites entered the promised land , thanks for your input and all the best on your personal journey ☺.

midnight..

menrov

Hi Midnight, sorry to say but I really do feel sorry for you. You said: After much research and prayer.

Funny as many on here and other forums also say After much research and prayer and decided to stay away from the WT. Or they become Catholic, Protestant or Hindu, or Muslim or even Buddhist. Go figure, same attitude, many different outcomes......

despite mistakes and errors

And you refer to the promised land. Do you know who was not allowed to get into the promised land? Was it because of the one error he made? Compare that to the number of errors of the WBTS organisation. Again, there are more reason to believe JW's will not enter the promised land than that they would (I mean with JW's not the individual but a collective group of members of the WBTS).

I understand that one feels comfortable in the organisation. Most of them have their family there, their friends and other relatives. And some congregations are quite nice (friendly elders, nice people, various social activities, relaxed attitude etc). And if that is the driver to join or stay, I can appreciate that.

Anyway, fortunately you live apparently in a country where you can make your choice of religion freely. And I wish you all the best.

33

Which bible translation do you think is best and most acurate?

by NikL in

jw
friends

for those that still care to read the bible of course.

those that don't, please keep the snarky comments to yourselves :-).

i am assuming nwt is not very popular?.

menrov

not mentioned yet: Studybible.info (has various interlinears as well).

or this

dukhrana.com/peshitta

I like NET ( read on lumina.bible.org/bible/matthew+1

as all footnotes)

38

If the WT is a "money making machine"...who gets the money?

by NikL in

jw
friends

i've seen claims over the years that wt is in the real estate, book publishing business and is a for profit enterprise at it's core.. can those of you that believe this to be the case tell me who benefits from all this wealth?.

the governing body lives in relatively humble conditions no?.

i've been curious about this for a while.

menrov

I have been thinking about this as well. Where do the billions made by all the real estate sales go to? One is for the many court cases and their lawyers. Then for the failures in investments (stock losses). And then, just a guess, I believe the organisation has shareholders. I will probably never be able to prove it but that is what I really think.

11

Jesus ransom or the sanctification of God's name the most important?

by Yesu Kristo Bwana Wangu in

some time ago, during the mid-week meeting, the sanctification of god’s name was being discussed (chapter 4 in ‘god’s kingdom rules’).

in paragraph nine we read that in the early period the jw’s viewed jesus ransom sacrifice as the most important teaching of the bible.

then they said they gave overbalanced importance to jesus, and nowadays, they say the sanctification of god’s name is the most important thing in the bible.. .

menrov

Yesuon Kristo Bwana Wangu , there are many arguments. It takes too long now for me to give you some. You can have a look on Beroeans.net on which this item is also discussed. Also have a look at discussthetruth.com

Take care.

12

Charitable works are not the foremost consideration of Christians

by Lostandfound in

remember that from the sermon outline booklet for field service use.. my question would be, has wt or witnesses performed any charitable works, even as a secondary condition.. i know of none, maybe you do..

menrov

They do "spiritual charity".......... via their "spiritual paradise" ..... giving "spiritual food".....

all funded by very mundane money....