"crofty":
"Again the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.” - 1 Sam 24:1
Actually, I checked and it's 2 Sam 24:1 (not 1 Sam 24:1).
Posts by SAHS
-
136After the cult how many reject faith in anything?
by Seraphim23 in[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:relyonvml /> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><![endif].
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-gb</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:en-us;} </style> <![endif].
-
-
-
136
After the cult how many reject faith in anything?
by Seraphim23 in[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:relyonvml /> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><![endif].
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-gb</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:en-us;} </style> <![endif].
-
-
SAHS
“Seraphim23”:
I think you’re kind of on the right track. It seems that you have some form of belief in God but not in the classical, orthodox, gothic-like “status quo” type of god that most people have believed in. People like to take God and sort of dress him up like some kind of doll, give him a specific name (Yahweh, Allah, Jehovah), and relate things that he is supposed to have said or commanded through certain prophets – like some kind of celestial “pet” conjured up to suit the cultural, anthropological phenomena of human development.
I, for one, have what I like to call the “A-B-C” belief regarding God. It is my personal take on the concept of God, as follows:
(A) There is NO God, there could not be, and everything that exists is solely from the processes of higher-order quantum physics and biological evolution; or,
(B) There IS, in fact, a divine God, and His name is so-and-so, and he created everything exactly according to the Bible book of Genesis, and he said such-and-such and this-and-that, and if we don’t follow exactly what he commanded in this Scripture and that Scripture, then such-and-such will happen to us and our future will ultimately be such-and-such (i.e., not very good, and not very long); . . . . OR,the following scenario – which is actually what I myself believe:
(C) There seems to be, in all probability, some kind of process which has the nature of “intelligent design,” BUT which does not definitively fit into the above options (A) or (B) in that the nature of the existence of such would logically be, in all probability, completely foreign and transcendent to the realm of any current theological or even empirical understanding. In other words, there is likely some form of “entity,” the existence of which being that which is the process of the origin of all that is known to exist. Moreover, such “entity” of process is completely and absolutely different than any belief or system of belief of any person or group.
I think it seems reasonable and plausible to ascribe to the above option (C) when you consider how people who were considered the most intelligent and intuitive people of their time attempted to grapple with fundamental scientific concepts, such as light, electricity, gravity, and even the most basic cosmological understand of the nature of stars, planets, and our relative position in the universe. Don’t forget, in pre-medieval times respected scientists actually believed that light was something that emanated from a person’s eye toward the object of focus and bounced back to convey vision into the eye, and also, around the earlier part of the 1900s, even the renowned theoretical physicist Albert Einstein was not aware of any galaxies other than our own (none had yet been discovered). And quantum physicists are still grappling with gravity (particle or wave?), not to mention dark matter and dark energy.
Thus, I personally believe that in projecting current human understanding toward the nature of that which is the ultimate causation and engineering of all that is known to exist, there is probably an ultimate “uncertainty principle” in that it would seem to be something which would continue to elude our understanding indefinitely.
-
22
CANADA | Toronto Star | May 3, 2013 - Jehovah's Witnesses: Kindness is an act of grace - not an obligation
by jwleaks inwho should be responsible for financially supporting jehovah's witnesses, who put misguided faith in the failed 1975 "end-of-the-world" predictions, and went full-time preaching without any consideration for retirement many years later?.
kindness is an act of grace not an obligationare successful brothers ethically required to help aging moneyless sister?
toronto star.
-
-
SAHS
Although it certainly is an unfortunate situation for this 65-year-old sister, I think that ultimately it is the responsibility for her to make rational and informed decisions as to her financial future. Some people have made other kinds of poor choices, such losing a significant amount of money on the stock market or the lottery, investing in risky or scandalous get-rich-quick ventures, squandering untold sums of money on substance addictions, involvement in criminal activity resulting in being sued or fined, etc.
At the same time, however, it must also be acknowledged that there can be mitigating factors, especially for someone who has been “trapped” in a cult. Remember, there are a lot of very intelligent people who have been suckered into these fanciful and disingenuous types of religious groups. (Look at all the celebrities, albeit rich, who are involved with cults such as the Mormons and Scientology.) As we all know, the dynamics of living in a JW family can make it extremely difficult if not impossible to just up and leave it. Now, I don’t know to what extent the pioneer sister in that article was blindsided or coerced in her attachment with the JWs (was she a born-in?), but it would seem that there would definitely be some factors that would tend to cause a person brought up in that environment to have been misled (i.e., kept in the dark, being encourage not to be self-sufficient or to critically research the organization).
So, although the responsibility for one’s course in life, including practical future planning, technically must rest on the individual, there should, moreover, be some degree of understanding and empathy taken into consideration. After all, no one would consciously want to be misled and disadvantaged by a deceptive cult. And if you or someone you really love were in such a situation, how do you think you would feel?
-
14
Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 04-28-2013 WT Study (TAKING GLORY)
by blondie incomments.
comments.
comments.
-
-
SAHS
Blondie:
Glad to hear that you are “on the upswing.”
Thank you so much for putting things in logical and reasonable perspective for us. It helps take the sting out of the fear and guilt that goes along with having been brought up in the religion organization since birth.
Actually, now I always leave some kind of subliminal point in my comments at the Sunday Watchtower study. Just as an example, a few weeks ago I mentioned how the 1914 date had been taught to be something entirely different than it is now (i.e., end, not beginning), and that such had been taught right up to at least 1929 (so much for the teachings in the ‘decades leading up to 1914’).
I always like to glean some little tidbits from this forum that I can somehow incorporate (hopefully “safely”) into my comments on Sunday to make people think, or at least say to themselves “Hmmm.” (I always get called on by the conductor seeing as my dad is a fairly well-known elder.)
You always do a good job at bringing out points that a lot of people probably wouldn’t even see. (Connecting those hidden, or maybe not so hidden, dots.)
I often think when I read your comments, Man, that’s a really good point; too bad I didn’t get the chance to have mentioned it last Sunday. I was thinking – certainly not to create any pressure, of course – that it would be really awesome if your comments were posted at least a day or two before the Sunday on which that particular study is to be considered. Then, at least in our congregation, perhaps some of your comments might very well end up being ‘Blondie’s Comments You, In Fact, WILL Hear at the [Next] WT Study.’
You have some excellent points. That would be awesome if some of us could have the chance to actually use them. (Hopefully done “safely” with discernment, of course, when that cordless microphone gets passed.)
-
-
-
SAHS
scotoma:
Actually, that’s a good point that you made. Now that I think of it, the desire or motivation to learn is actually a need. Not a lower need, such as immediate safety, shelter, or water, but a need nonetheless – a higher need. I am thinking of Abraham Maslow’s famous “hierarchy of needs” – see the following diagram at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maslow%27s_Hierarchy_of_Needs.svg
And since investigation and learning, along with play, creativeness, and intellectualization/philosophizing, could also be classified as a need, then that would seem to be a kind of dissonance seeking resolution, or at least indulgence as and end in itself.
Interesting how what drives us works.
-
55
Lot's of talk on the July Watchtower?
by noonehome inso i've heard lots of talk from within about the 'new light' in this watchtower...i'm yet to look at it in any detail.
i'm kind of surprised actually...i first heard about it here before it was even available but close to the time it did come out people started bringing it up - even our co.. some say things like "have you heard about this?
" or "big changes," or "allot of things they said we believed, i didn't realize,"(lots of that) or "brain-overload" or " too much information, but i've never felt more pumped up" or "it's soo exciting to see jehovah's spirit lead his organization..." or "it requires time to sink in, but it's a good feeling!
-
-
SAHS
Listener:
“They have included both the anointed and the other sheep as 'domestics'. ”
“The events taking place in that farmer’s field illustrate how and when Jesus would gather out of mankind the entire wheat class—anointed Christians who will rule with him in his Kingdom. ”
That’s a good point, and I’m glad you brought it up. Now that I remember – in 1919 the domestic “wheat class” then being gathered was solely the anointed. The appointment at that time would basically have been the select (elitist?) group of anointed, a.k.a. the Governing Body, over the rest of the anointed (i.e., a very small group of anointed appointed to feed the rest of their anointed brothers). As I recall, it wasn’t until 1935 that the domestics formally came to include the non-anointed other sheep (the “Jonadab class”).
So, the Governing Body really was never formally appointed over the entire domestics; only over the anointed wheat class in 1919 (appointment number one). Of course, the domestics right now apparently do include the non-anointed other sheep, but it seems kind of strange that the other sheep were not even identified as being part of the domestics to be fed at 1919 up to 1935.
I think that the ultimate “short answer” to all of this is simply that, in reality, the Governing Body has basically appointed themselves. They’re just still sorting out exactly who they are and who they control. (I think we’ll all be dead before that would ever be ironed out.)
-
-
-
SAHS
scotoma:
“The force behind cognitive dissonance is the force for discovery. ”
I checked the dictionary and Wiki, and “dissonance” is characterized as “lack of harmony” (e.g., a dissonant musical chord), and also a “state of mental conflict.” This seems to suggest that dissonance implies something negative, or, simply put, something isn’t right (i.e., something which causes a kind of “error message” in the mind, in response to something in need of resolution).
Satanus:
“ Its a symptom of conflict between a belief held and evidence to the contrary. ”
This seems to be more, in a practical sense, representative of the mechanism of dissonance.
I don’t think that dissonance is something that arises from the motivation for discovery. Rather, I think that it is something that is the result of a mismatch between what a person knows to be true, based on acquired valid evidence, and what erroneous or fallacious belief they choose to hold on to without effecting resolution.
Think of when there is a mismatch between your visual sense and your equilibrium in your inner ear – the result, as we know, is vertigo/dizziness and nausea (when drunk or when on a boat in the waves). End result: puke.
As an example: I could be in a house which is filling with smoke, causing me to choke and burning my eyes. Now, immediately there is dissonance – my mind is giving me an “error message” that I am in danger and must seek remedy by leaving the situation. Of course, I would do so right away, thus eliminating the dissonance through resolution.
If, on the other hand, I chose to stay in that irritating and noxious smoke – now that would be dissonance, which would be very pronounced and continuous. That dissonance would be a result of acting out of harmony with logic and common sense, which would result in me passing out and probably ending up burnt to a crisp.
Now, that would make about as much sense as choosing to remain in a destructive cult after discovering evidence of such. As fanciful as that might seem, that is in effect what people are doing when they choose to indefinitely put off indulging in such “inconvenient truth” and thus prevent resolution of the dissonance by, well, leaving.
-
55
Lot's of talk on the July Watchtower?
by noonehome inso i've heard lots of talk from within about the 'new light' in this watchtower...i'm yet to look at it in any detail.
i'm kind of surprised actually...i first heard about it here before it was even available but close to the time it did come out people started bringing it up - even our co.. some say things like "have you heard about this?
" or "big changes," or "allot of things they said we believed, i didn't realize,"(lots of that) or "brain-overload" or " too much information, but i've never felt more pumped up" or "it's soo exciting to see jehovah's spirit lead his organization..." or "it requires time to sink in, but it's a good feeling!
-
-
SAHS
[EDIT TO EARLIER POST:]
I would just like to clarify my earlier post (Web page two herein) where I stated the following:
“ • “The appointment over ‘all the belongings’ is when the Governing Body arrive in heaven, and after the start of the great tribulation.”
From this, as I see it, it seems that the Governing Body are now giving themselves a “get-out-of-trouble-free card”: the domestics (anointed and other sheep) are the ones who can be scrutinized because they are the ones who have been around (“appointed”) since 1919 to be able to be scrutinized; however, the Governing Body hasn’t even been formally “appointed,” and won’t be, until after they arrive in heaven, and after the start of the great tribulation. ”
==========
Actually, in the above I was responding to a specific post. The part of the post I was responding to in the above bullet point was, in fact, technically correct; however, specifically it only relates to the appointment of the Governing Body over “all the belongings,” which appointment is, in fact, to be “in heaven, and after the start of the great tribulation” – BUT, this is apparently to be their second appointment. Their first appointment has apparently already been made in 1919, with that past appointment being over the “domestics” (wheat class) here on earth.
I was relying solely on a specific part of a particular post, and I have since read all the study articles in the upcoming July 15, 2013 Watchtower magazine so I am now able to clarify the above. I apologize for any confusion in not waiting until I could flesh out that point in more detail.
So, just to recap: according to that upcoming Watchtower, the Governing Body is given two appointments; one appointment in 1919 over the earthly “domestics,” and the other appointment to be in heaven over all the belongings after the start of the great tribulation.
Still, it seems that the Governing Body hasn’t yet been completely formally appointed in the fullest sense – they have been given a “limited” appointment over all the earthly domestics (anointed and other sheep), but their second future appointment in heaven is to be over all of the belongings, including those in heaven itself! As paragraph 17 on page 24 of that July 15, 2013 Watchtower states, “What do ‘all [Jesus’] belongings’ include? Jesus did not qualify the word ‘all,’ as if to limit his belongings to earthly things. In fact, Jesus has vast heavenly authority. . . . His belongings now include the Messianic Kingdom . . . which he will share with his anointed followers.”
When I first read that, it almost sounded to me like a kind of “secondary heavenly class” (which sort of reminded me of Raymond Franz’s idea), with those who last represented the Governing Body as a whole becoming a kind of special, elitist group in heaven over the rest of the anointed “Twenty-Four Elders” in Revelation (kind of like how it is now here on earth, except here on earth all the rest of the anointed, which comprise the Faithful and Discreet Slave Class, have been completely demoted). However, such is apparently not the case, as paragraph 19 states, “Does the faithful slave receive a greater reward in heaven than the rest of the anointed? No. A reward promised to a small group in one setting may ultimately be shared by others. . . . He [Jesus] indicated that all of the 144,000 will sit on thrones and share his rulership.” (Although, mind you, they’re certainly always being rewarded with glory from people down here.)
It’s all rather confusing, and no doubt this will all be changed/tweaked again. All well. The constant spate of diarrheic concoctions continues, I guess.
-
14
Question for Elders... Will Refusing to meet with Elders - Avoid Disfellowshipping?
by rrb2016 indoes anyone know if this strategy will work to avoid being disfellowshipped?
if one moves their card from one hall to another before a "wrongdoing" becomes public - and then refuses to meet with the elders at the new hall - will they simply be able to fade away without being disfellowshipped.
i had heard that if you refuse to meet with the elders, they generally will not df you - in order to avoid possible legal issues.
-
-
SAHS
I think it’s the same as refusing a breathalyzer test – you will still get charged and lose your license, as in that particular case the law has to assume the person was legally impaired, and they are presumed guilty by default.
Also, it would be like skipping a court appearance for certain misdemeanor offences, for which you could be charged in absentia (you snooze, you lose).
Now, in the case of being summoned to an elder judicial committee, I think that whether you would be disfellowshipped or not probably depends on how much evidence they think they have against you and how strong they think their case might be – and also, of course, just how serious the alleged offence would be in the first place.
The only thing I could suggest if someone was in a real bind would be to just run – run fast and far, and try to cover their tracks as best they could. And if worse came to worse and the person ended up actually being disfellowshipped, then, well, at least they would be given an opportunity to make a clean break from the cult, which, all things considered, would seem to be a positive outcome in the long run.
-
-
-
SAHS
I would think that cognitive dissonance would be the driving force behind the LACK of discovery – i.e., not wanting to discover empirical truths, or resisting/oppressing the human need to do so.
Of course, the REAL cognitive dissonance would be to stifle the urge to research empirical truths about things which have already been discovered and proven - including updated empirical truths which indicate that certain current or historical empirical truths already discovered are/were, in fact, incorrect or completely disproven/improvable.
In other words, the cognitive dissonance comes when there is LACK of humility and willingness to discover the true nature of things using the scientific method. Any human understanding of truths/facts/information relating to either things in the natural world/universe, humanity/sociology, or religious/philosophical ideas always has to be open to scrutiny and the discovery of any inconsistencies or fallacies arising from such human understanding.
Put simply: cognitive dissonance comes from NOT discovering and from NOT being willing to reexamine what is discovered.
