What's the matter with that? I would think that anyone whose value is far more than that of corals would be pleased to give her due to her husbandly owner who values her so much!
AlanF
Posts by AlanF
-
49"Giving Your Wifely Due"
by love2Bworldly indid anyone hate that expression as much as i did?
my husband and i are separated right now, and my jw sister reminded me on the phone the other day to make sure i gave him 'his wifely due'.
that expression makes me want to barf.
-
-
-
21
Is There Anything That You Still Believe In Because of the Witnesses?
by minimus ini still don't believe in hellfire.
i think astrology and palm reading is ridiculous.
that's a couple of things that i know i got from being a jw......what about you??
-
-
AlanF
Hmm, because of the Witnesses.
Well sure! I believe they're royally f**ked up.
AlanF
-
148
A bit reluctant
by saki2fifty ini'm a bit reluctant in writing this post, for i dont feel i should be here.
even a bit nervous... .
i've never officially dedicated myself to jehovah, but i was brought up in the truth, very strong, and at times when getting older, there were lulls in my attendance... yet to this day i still attend.
-
-
AlanF
Saki, I'll add my two cents.
If you don't lean on your own understanding, then upon whose do you lean?
If you claim to lean on Jehovah's understanding, then how do you know what Jehovah is supposed to be saying in the Bible is right, except by leaning on your own understanding that what the Bible says is right? On the other hand, if you lean on the understanding of men who claim to speak for God, such as the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses, then aren't you leaning on their understanding? You already know quite well that these men are not inspired and have often gotten extremely important matters wrong, even to the point of causing many unnecessary deaths and stumbling people away from God.
In the end, unless you give your thinking ability over completely to someone else, you have no choice but to rely on your own understanding of just about everything you come across in life.
In case you're wondering, I quit the JWs some 25 years ago because I could no longer tolerate the Society's overridiing scholastic dishonesty. I can say with certainty that, unless you put all your doubts to bed, they'll haunt you forever.
I can also say that unless you can honestly deal with the many issues of the Society's dishonesty raised in the following link, you won't honestly be able to claim that you stick with the JWs due to real knowledge, but only because it makes you feel good:
http://corior.blogspot.com/ "Research on the Watchtower"
AlanF
-
15
Ebabbar Cylinder 2:14 A JW email "explaining" its significance...
by AuldSoul ini got a look at this email received by someone i know very well (namely, me must be extended based on the sole proof of the ebabbar cylinder 2:14 (which i can't seem to locate for independent research, so help along those lines would be appreciated).. i will post the email and then examine the argument for accuracy/validity.
all grammatical errors were in the original.. brandon.
i'm well aware with the length of the kings and the what wts said about them.
-
-
AlanF
No surprise, AuldSoul. Fred Hall is nothing if not Furuli's lap dog. Kind of reminds me of that poor dog that keeps winning the Ugliest Dog In the World contest.
AlanF
-
15
Ebabbar Cylinder 2:14 A JW email "explaining" its significance...
by AuldSoul ini got a look at this email received by someone i know very well (namely, me must be extended based on the sole proof of the ebabbar cylinder 2:14 (which i can't seem to locate for independent research, so help along those lines would be appreciated).. i will post the email and then examine the argument for accuracy/validity.
all grammatical errors were in the original.. brandon.
i'm well aware with the length of the kings and the what wts said about them.
-
-
AlanF
Interesting email, AuldSoul. The buggered English is extremely reminiscent of that of Fred Hall. I wonder if your "buddy" is good old Fridolin in disguise.
AlanF
-
601
For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE
by Swamboozled injust got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
-
-
AlanF
As I said, thirdwitless, you continue refusing to answer relevant questions. Your words above are mere excuses as to why you shouldn't.
JW lurkers, continue to take note.
AlanF
-
601
For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE
by Swamboozled injust got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
-
-
AlanF
Hillary_Step wrote:
: Are you up for this challenge ThirdWitness? If you wish, you may engage the help of Scholar in this enterprise.
Oooh! Oooh! Yaaahh!
We really, really, really should petition Simon to reinstate Fred Hall! Three Stooges In Defense of the Watchtower, unite! Throw off your chains! Smash those wiley apostates!
AlanF
-
601
For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE
by Swamboozled injust got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
-
-
AlanF
Death to the Pixies wrote:
: Reply: Well, if he does not do a Vol II that will be still be one book more than you and Alan will ever manage on chronology. Sorry but it's true :>)
Perhaps, but that's because neither one of us is interested in taking on such a task. However, Carl Jonsson and Rudd Persson will most certainly be taking on that task, and will no doubt trash Furuli's claims as thoroughly as they've already done with Furuli's 1st volume.
: Just a quick additonal question for clarification on the earlier question that you were generous enough to answer for me....
Um, another poster already answered you adequately.
: So do I read you correctly when I assume from your answer (re: Ezekial's date) that you agree with the WT on the dating of the book and authorship?.(ie, not a post-exile work and forgery by later hands?)
I agree that much of Ezekiel is not a post-exilic work, but not having thoroughly explored the issue, I can't say much more. I'm entirely with Leolaia on this. However, this in no way means that I think that Ezekiel's dirges about Tyre, Egypt and so forth are inspired. Indeed, the dirges themselves show backtracking as the earlier words were not literally fulfilled, and new events forced new interpretations. It is this very backtracking that indicate that later redactors did little, if anything, to those dirges. But I'm really not interested in going into this in detail.
Now, you might take a swipe at answering the questions I posed above for thirdwitless.
AlanF
-
601
For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE
by Swamboozled injust got this link sent to me by my sister in law and i just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start.
i know that arguing with a jw is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but i want a comeback!!!
http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm
-
-
AlanF
thirdwitless, it is evident to almost all readers that you've completely failed to support your case. Although you tell yourself that you've dealt with all questions, you most certainly have not. You've simply ignored 90% of the questions posed to you -- pointed questions that you know would destroy your case if you answered them. Destroy your case, not in the sense that it has not already been thoroughly trashed, but in your own mind. Questions such as:
Why have you committed apostasty against "the faithful slave" by promoting a private interpretation at odds with its published doctrine on the meaning of Tyre's 70 years?
Why do you and the Watchtower Society not interpret Exodus literally?
"In six days Jehovah made the heavens and the earth, the sea and everything that is in them."--Exodus 20:11
"In six days Jehovah made the heavens and the earth."--Exodus 31:17
There are many other questions, but these suffice to prove my point.
The reason you refuse to answer is that you know very well that giving the obvious answers would refute your claim that the Bible must be interpreted literally whenever you or the Watchtower Society say it must.
JW lurkers, please take note of thirdwitless' lack of response.
AlanF
-
16
JW says Jehovah's People aren't Brainwashed
by Honesty inwell from what i understand a cult is something that expects you to follow some man.
you must give up your individual thought processes and just go with what you are told to think.
this way you are released from individual responsibility.
-
-
AlanF
That blinded JW cultist wrote:
: Well from what I understand a cult is something that expects you to follow some man.
That definition is taken right from The Watchtower. Of course The Watchtower will define "cult" in such a way as to excuse the Watchtower cult from the definition. "We don't follow a man! We follow Jehovah and Jesus!" Duh. They forget that the Governing Body is comprised of men who demand absolute allegiance and complete subservience from their JW followers.
: You must give up your individual thought processes and just go with what you are told to think. This way you are released from individual responsibility. Some people like this about cults. They don't want to be responsible for their own actions.
A damned good description of the JW cult mindset.
: I see no evidence of this among Jehovah's people.
Cult members never see themselves as cult members.
: We certainly never ask for "blind faith" as I saw on TV that one religious group was advocating.
Of course they do. The typical thing is that a "Bible student" will come up with some difficult problems for the JW "teacher". The JW will usually try to persuade student to put the difficulties aside, saying, "When you have more knowledge of other things, these difficulties will be resolved." Of course, the JW hopes that the person will give in to the lie that the Governing Body speaks for God and should not be questioned, and that the student will by osmosis absorb the never-stated JW teaching that asking difficult questions is grounds for dismissal. If the student is braindead enough to swallow all that, well and good. If not, the student quits and is saved from a terrible fate.
An article detailing how JWs subvert one's thinking processes can be found here:
http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/thinking-ability-and-watchtower.html
AlanF