steelers v. jaguars just ended.
wow, my pulse is pounding.
i haven't felt like this about football since we went to the superbowl in 1995. wow.
Football? FOOTBALL?!
I'd sooner call myself a Jehovah's Witness than concede the game you guys are talking about is actually football!! We've had all this out before [ http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/4328/1.ashx ], when will you dear Americans learn?
Nic'
A perfect example of why we don't go to the stadiums to watch soccer football games in Britain...... the fans... ... the black eye was for calling it soccer.... lol
Brad
wts has quite a few traits which are typical of totalitarian systems.
many of them have been demonstrated on this board (labeling, shunning, monopoly on truth, propaganda, indoctrination, polarization of reality etc.)..
there is one more aspect of the wts religion which can also be observed in most totalitarian systems and that is the system of granting privileges.
JTP,
In a very few days you have already made quite a few great comments already and this one is no exception either. I thought your points about jobs that they typically fill was a very valid observation:
But my theory is that people need something fulfilling in their life, career, religion, relationship, etc... and some people have such empty lives that the "title" and "power" in the religion does it for them.
I have always felt..... (and I hope I'm not unwittingly insulting anyone here either.. but....) .. that it's kind of like a security guard mentality. The power that they have is peanuts compared to cops... to the rest of the world at least... but they delude themselves with thinking that they have the same power.
Witnesses are a parallel..... they delude themselves with these positions of power... whether it be elders, ministerial servants, mics, talks, even hours in field service.... but it is never a true representation of having any REAL power. Real power comes from personal freedom.... to think and act FREELY, yet in a positive way. That's why when we get out we see the difference so well. The truth was out here, yet hidden from us when we were inside.
Brad
i was going to add this to a comment to a post of mine in rune's topic "why?
" (if anybody was paying attention to it) but i figured i would start my own thread on it.. i have always liked quotes, especially very profound life lessons revealed in a short quip.. one of my favorites is by michel de montaigne: .
"man is surely stark mad.
I was going to add this to a comment to a post of mine in Rune's topic "Why? Why? WHY???" (if anybody was paying attention to it) but I figured I would start my own thread on it.
I have always liked quotes, especially very profound life lessons revealed in a short quip.
One of my favorites is by Michel de Montaigne:
"Man is surely stark mad. For he cannot create a flea, but he makes Gods by the dozens."
What is/are yours?Brad
ok. i have some questions, and thought this may be a place to get some answers.. i'm going to be honest here, so please don't bash me too much, as i was never a jw.. in july i was out at a drinking establishment in my home town.
my husband and i have been having marital trouble, and we were trying a trial seperation.
guys were hitting on me left and right--which i had absolutely no interest in.
I would agree with Jared that your first step should be to find out about his lifestyle. Like Jared said, he is either no longer a JW, or on the edge of leaving or he is "leading a double life" as they call it, because he is not supposed to be associating with you even if he is a JW in good standing.
As nice as the guy is, IMHO, if he is a devout JW who just broke the rules for a few days, I would reinstate my opinion that you should get out of there. Most of the time the JWs' true personalities don't come out when you first meet them. A lot of their beliefs are unhealthy, especially for women who seem to be as independent as you do.
As far as oral sex goes, I believe the guys who run the JW religion have kind of tried to keep their noses out of that area (no pun intended...lol) lately, but yeah, they used to pretty much say that only "missionary" was OK.
Hope this helps. Let us know what his standing is when you find it out.
Brad
ok. i have some questions, and thought this may be a place to get some answers.. i'm going to be honest here, so please don't bash me too much, as i was never a jw.. in july i was out at a drinking establishment in my home town.
my husband and i have been having marital trouble, and we were trying a trial seperation.
guys were hitting on me left and right--which i had absolutely no interest in.
Simple advice, Jellybean...... RUN!!!
Brad
(P.S. I am kidding..... partly.... lol. I will read you entire post later to see if I can help you in any way. )
.
is that true?
frankie,
As you bring out, differences of opinion lead to conflict,,and that is because there is no real love,, just attachment,,possesiveness,, and seeking satisfaction of desires. Real love is "not" seeking personal satisfaction,, "not" being possesive,,"not" seeking attachment to combat our loneliness.
I'm not sure if I am getting your point or not, but if I am then I would agree with Brenda's opinion that unconditional love is not possible to sustain in a relationship. Sometimes the partner might just screw up. If I screw up, I expect my partner to point it out to me. However I may not listen properly when it is pointed out to me and an argument (i.e. possessing our differing opinions) results.
Unconditional love is a good model to hold out to reach for, but isn't it also necessary to realize that it is not always possible to attain. We are inherently imperfect after all.
Brad
this topic has been rolling around in my head for some time.
i don't expect that i'll write it perfectly as it needs to be articulated in different ways for different people...but i will do my best.
and worst of all, i am not expecting any kind of response that will satisfy me.
kitties and horses,
I can understand how you can perceive that I am attacking or insulting Rune, even though that is not my intention. You are absoluttely right that I do not know Rune well enough to diagnose him with any specific disorder. Nor am I a psychiatrist.
IMO we all have tendencies that lean towards the "borderline personality disorder" traits that I have experienced in people, but some display these tendencies more than others. It is basically a disorder where we can't seem to admit that we have made a mistake. Quite a few posts ago I invited Rune to Google it and see if he felt that any of it applied to him. I got no response on it so it is up to him as to what he does about that.
Regarding this topic of his, though, I will say it a different way than how I have, since I seem to have given people reason to think that I am attacking him. Throughout this topic he has told people that they are seeing things the "wrong way" constantly. If he truly wants a debate, this is not the best way to go about it.
I'll give you an example:
Big Tex said: Actually what I said was, "The beginning of wisdom is the recognition of how little one actually knows."
Rune responded with: Recognizing how little you actually know != deciding you know nothing, ok.
That is not what Big Tex said. Big Tex was making a point that most here would agree with. Basically being close-minded like even he humbly admitted to 20 years ago, we eventually realize that our ABSOLUTE reality was in fact flawed. Instead of acknowledging Big Tex's intelligent observation Rune replied with a comment that was not even accurately describing BT's viewpoint.
Big Tex responded with: Little does not equal nothing. Wisdom does not equal knowledge. Life, the universe and the restaurant at the end of it is not a list of facts and figures. thus clarifying his viewpoint to Rune.
Instead of admitting that he, whether intentionally or not, twisted BT's viewpoint Rune responded with this: You knew? Then perhaps you should not be so full of conviction. I 'know' facts and figures, knowing full well that they are not 100% absolute. You are just stressing the word to the point where knowing means you have no consideration for the validity of the information being off. That's silly.
The end result was that they both agreed that nothing is absolute. However, that was BT's viewpoint all along. Rune decided to tell BT that he was wrong first and then agree, never having admitted that his original assessment of BT's viewpoint was innacurate or the risk of being absolute, Rune was just WRONG.
I have absolutely no ill will towards Rune, I am simply trying to make an observation that I quite frankly feel is valid and may even help him. I don't really know Big Tex at all either, other than reading his posts for slightly longer than Rune's. My own involvement in this topic thrown neatly aside for the moment, from my observation of the thread, Big Tex has a healthier outlook on life than does Rune. Intelligence or debating abilities thrown aside as well, if I wanted advice on any situation I would go to Big Tex first, based solely on the discussion in this topic.
Rune can take my observation as being completely irrelevant or he can take it to heart. Only he will truly know which of these happens. Or will he?
Before anybody suggests that this post is off topic, the Big Tex/Rune discussion displays in itself my answer to his question of "Why? Why? WHY???": Because we never really ever know the absolute answer. Our perceptions will change all the time but the journey to ATTEMPT to find the answers is a better ride when we are AWARE of this same life lesson repeated to us constantly. Our willingness to accept it as a life lesson has a direct correlation to how well we adjust to the journey.
Brad
.
is that true?
frankie,
The symbolical use we put to the word love is full of paradox. I think we can better understand it thru negation.
If you could elaborate on that, I'm interested to see if you have a very different way of looking at it than me.
While waiting for your comment, here's my take on it: one of the challenges in a relationship that I think JTP was talking about is that showing unconditional love in a relationship is hard to accomplish. To love unconditionally we also have to be aware that WE are just as important in the relatinship as the other person is. This inevitably leads to differences of opinion, which can be misconstrued by either party as the other not truly loving them.
Not having all the good things..... (and from my observation, in a relationship where both parties are aware of what unconditional love is, they have enough good times that they do miss those good times) leads to the couple getting over it quickly or getting back together and the love grows stronger.
Does that make sense? It's my impression of what you mean about how negation makes us realize what true love is. I tried, anyway.
Brad
this topic has been rolling around in my head for some time.
i don't expect that i'll write it perfectly as it needs to be articulated in different ways for different people...but i will do my best.
and worst of all, i am not expecting any kind of response that will satisfy me.
Rune, you said, regarding my posts:
You make so many unfounded statements about me. Don't bother, whether you think they are true or not. No matter what I say, if the content doesn't make sense, argue the content back with something to see if what I said stands up when I reply. Making needless judgements about my personality accomplishes nothing useful, nor does stating distinctions between people. This means mentioning age, or saying someone is a 'teacher'. If they are so wise, let them argue my or anyone else's points and exemplify it rather than talking about their flaunted qualities.
I think you are still missing my bigger point. When you start a topic like this you leave the door open for many different viewpoints. It is not up to you to tell everybody that they have to say things EXACTLY as you wish them to be said. Open the door completely or don't open it at all. Don't try to minimize other people's contribution to this debate because they have made a couple of comments about age or "smelling Africa". Age and experience does play a part in people's opinion. If you do not think that 10 years from now you will have a different perception than you do now, you are pretty much contradicting your own thesis right of the bat.
It is interesting that you do these things and then fail to realize that by saying things like this: "If they are so wise, let them argue my or anyone else's points and exemplify it rather than talking about their flaunted qualities.", that you are actually doing the very "flaunting" that you are condemning them of doing. It is odd that you don't realize it.
As far as your deeper personality, and I am sure you must admit that you have one; I have had a lot of experience dealing with people who, like you, condemn others while they are in fact more guilty of doing what they are condemning the others of doing. And yes it has been recognized by others enough to in fact be called a "personality disorder".
Having said that, it also applies to your original Question of "Why, Why, WHY??". God does not exist exclusively outside of you. He exists as a part of your being as well. So do emotion and many other personality traits exist within you. As much as you try to suggest that you are the only one here who is capable of separating emotion from this debate, from what I have seen I think the opposite is true. You have not acknowledged a single point that I have made regarding emotion being a very part of our spirit and therefore impossible to be left out of debate. Yet you do make denigrating comments about people 'flaunting their own qualities'. Denial does not eliminate the actual evidence; quite often it only reinforces the fact that the person has some character flaws, which IMHO should be addressed as a part of this exercise of yours.
Regarding your opinion of my statements being unfounded: They are statements, to be sure, but they have been made after reading all of your posts. I would not want them to be considered as ABSOLUTE. But the more you go on in this topic, the more they are becomining founded. Interesting how that works, isn't it?
Brad
gandhi
gandhi walked barefoot everywhere, to the point that his feet became quite thick and hard.
he also was quite a spiritual person.
XW,
Are you just VERY observant or did you notice that through some sort of technological way? I suppose it could be a younger sister or roommate though couldn't it?
I'm not too computer literate myself but doesn't it possibly mean that they just use the same computer?
But still, very observant of you!!!!!!!!!!!
Brad
