i read the most extraordinary claim the other day.
"the bible is factual.
" i wondered, how could the speaker possibly back up such a claim?
Tetrapod.Sapien,
I am willing to admit that I could be wrong. However, since I am going to live as though I am right it doesn't really matter that I may be wrong. That being the case, the question of whether I may be wrong becomes a futile device as surely as the one who challenges the existence of anything will still behave as though things exist.
BTW, speaking of debates, it's still your turn in our other discussion.
Respectfully,
OldSoul
have any of you ever feel abandoned by "friends" because you dont associate (congregate) with them anymore?
there is a couple of 'friends' that i haven't talked to for about a year, (because i dont go to the meetings).
i dont have anything against them or the congregation.
(((Smoky))),
Going through it right now. It is a hard thing to experience. They prove how conditional their love is, and it hurts to know that your friends are only your friends if you do what they want you to do. You are not alone, we'll pull through somehow.
Respectfully,
OldSoul
my husband and i are planning to make biodiesel for our diesel car.
looks like it will be a hobby for him-- he enjoys chemistry.
we will make a fumeless processor, and put the whole setup in our basement.
I am following with avid interest the progression of the Thermal Depolymerization (TDP) process, commonly known as "Anything Into Oil."
i read the most extraordinary claim the other day.
"the bible is factual.
" i wondered, how could the speaker possibly back up such a claim?
CYP and kid-a, I think you are both describing the same thing: the moment when you stopped believing what others told you to believe and started believing for yourself. Kid-a, you think it was a loss of belief, but from your description it was actually the point at which you started to determine your beliefs.
Respectfully,
OldSoul
now, could you do us all a favour and read the replies to your post in the 607 thread?
there were a lot of questions raised by your comment and i think it would be a good witness if you would at least attempt to answer them.
two very important ones are:.
I think Scholar is trying to open a window I have not seen anyone crawl through yet. I'll take a stab:
Agents of God according to the Bible (incomplete list):
Noah, known
Moses, known
Gabriel, known
Jesus, known
12 Apostles, known
Saul/Apostle Paul, known
Jeremiah, known
Ezekiel, known
Why, these men were simply glory hounds! They actually did things and admitted who it was that did them. In fact, there are rarely "agents of God" that the Bible records who were unknown. Did God share his glory with these men? According to Paul, yes. (2 Corinthians 3:18) Odd. This now smacks of false piety, false humility, obfuscation of truth, and an attempt to shield those who translated from coming under any scrutiny as to competence for the task.
Let us see what the publishers claim regarding the translators:
w74 12/15 p. 768 Questions from ReadersSimilarly, we note that they say little about their personal qualifications or educational background. In translating God’s Word, the New World Bible Translation Committee has felt that the particulars of their university or other educational training are not the important thing, though the translation itself testifies to their qualifications. A close examination of their work should direct the reader, not to the translators, but to the Bible’s Author, Jehovah God.
How many of them went to a University? How many of them had any formal training beyond high school? We don't know. How can we test their scholarship or lack thereof? We can't, directly. The only way is by referencing the comments of others whose qualifications are available for review. Their comments make it very clear that the translation definitely testifies to a gross lack of qualifications. Therefore, the publisher's claim that "the translation itself testifies to their qualifications" is certainly true, if devious in its contextual assertion.
w69 11/15 p. 696 "Between-the-Lines" Translations of the BibleNo claim of divine inspiration is made for these translations in modern-day language. The translators had to do what even the inspired Bible writer, "the congregator," King Solomon, had to do, and that is, search to "find the delightful words and the writing of correct words of truth." (Eccl. 12:10) Nevertheless, in all this searching they have trusted in the guidance, not inspiration, of God's holy spirit. Solomon indeed wrote his books in the Bible with "delightful words." The translators tried to imitate him.
Now we have the true source of their qualified translation: guidance by God's holy spirit. Oddly, they claim to have "imitated" Solomon. But they claim that Solomon was inspired, then they specifically note they were not inspired taking pains to differentiate between "guidance" and "inspiration." One dictionary defines "inspire" this way:
in·spire verbin·spired, in·spir·ing, in·spires verb, transitive
1. To affect, guide, or arouse by divine influence.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company
Merriam-Webster Online defines the word this way:
Main Entry: in·spirePronunciation: in-'spIr Function: verbInflected Form(s): in·spired; in·spir·ingEtymology: Middle English, from Middle French & Latin; Middle French inspirer, from Latin inspirare, from in- + spirare to breathe
transitive senses1 a : to influence, move, or guide by divine or supernatural inspiration b : to exert an animating, enlivening, or exalting influence on inspired
by the Romanticists c : to spur on : IMPEL, MOTIVATE inspire people to work d : AFFECT inspired him with nostalgia
The primary definition of inspire in this dictionary is "To affect, guide, or arouse by divine influence," or "to influence, move, or guide by divine or supernatural inspiration". So, what is the difference between guidance and inspiration? For that matter, what is the essential difference between "spirit-directed" and "spirit-inspired"? There is none. It is a semantic difference that allows Jehovah's Witnesses to quickly respond like offended gullible idiots whenever someone challenges their religion's history of false prophecy. I used to respond like a gullible idiot, too.
"The Faithful and Discreet Slave class are guided by holy spirit, but they are not inspired by it. They never claim to be inspired." What a fool I was. A trusting, gullible fool. I didn't realize that "guide," "inspire," and "direct" are absolutely interchangable terms when it comes to a spiritual force accomplishing the verb. They all mean the identical thing.
But wait! Should all claims of spirit guided writings be credited with authority? Not according to the publishers of the New World Translation:
w62 4/1 p. 220 A Look at MormonismThere can be no question about Mormon sincerity in their beliefs, but sincerity does not make their beliefs true. Truth is not established by personal conviction. Many persons since the days of the apostles have claimed to have had visions and to be prophets of God. The firm conviction of those who believed them did not make the teachings of these persons true. Usually these self-appointed prophets had to proclaim their own writings as holy scripture in order to find the support for their teachings that the Bible does not give. The best protection against such deceptions is to compare religious teachings with the Bible. Use it as the measuring rod of truth. Follow John's advice: "Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired expression, but test the inspired expressions to see whether they originate with God, because many false prophets have gone forth into the world."---1 John 4:1.
In my opinion, this is excellent advice. Oh, if only Jehovah's Witnesses would follow it!
Respectfully,
OldSoul
while i think it's perfectly okay, i do wonder what motivates jws to post here and especially to also express views critical of ex-jws.
is it the freudian notion of "projection": the jw who denounces something in others that he or she is also guilty of?
hence, if a jw clearly denounces an apostate's faults, it must mean the jw is really against apostasy when it might be something he or she struggles with.
Defd,
I appreciate that expression. I believe you on both counts. I believe you are addicted and I believe you want to help those on their way out by "snatching them out of the fire." I just wish would not assume that any question you can't answer is automatically insincere or foolish. I also wish you would stop playing judge as to motive. You are not a discerner of hearts. You assume someone else's seat when you do that, a seat somewhat more lofty than that of Moses.
Being unable to sustain your religion's doctrine Scripturally should make you seriously consider whether you are "noble-minded" (which means "fair-minded in your evaluation of a matter") or whether you have accepted leaven (impurities) as truth along with other truths.
Every ounce of rationale behind submitting to the authority of the Faithful and Discreet Slave is vested in the doctrine that (1) as a class they comprise (2) God's spirit-directed organization on earth today (3) for the purpose of discerning and dispensing "new light" (4) to the other sheep who can't get this light through any other means.
You have yet to show Scripture supporting any of these inviolable doctrinal points. Do you know of any Scriptural proof? If so, please help me get out of the fire.
Respectfully,
OldSoul
galatians 6:10- really, then, as long as we have time favorable for it, let us work what is good toward all, but especially toward those related to [us] in the faith.
i was thinking this weekend with hurricane rita devastating texas and louisiana that the jw's really do take care of their own when disasters strike.
however if you clearly read that scripture in galatians it says "work what is good towards all" then it says "espcially those related to us in the faith".
anewme,
Ozzie likely views the preaching work as, in essence, the spreading of lies in the name of God. I am quickly coming to believe that to be the case. If the objective of the preaching work is not primarily the saving of mankind but is primarily the recruitment of other preachers (donators), then I agree with Ozzie's assessment that their preaching work is crap.
Disdaining opinions of others where they differ from your own is your prerogative, but there are healthier ways to react.
Respectfully,
OldSoul
i read the most extraordinary claim the other day.
"the bible is factual.
" i wondered, how could the speaker possibly back up such a claim?
By God, I like you, jgnat!!!
You have beautifully expressed my feelings on the matter. Where the Scientific Method makes sense, it should be used and its results heeded. When it makes claims about matters outside its scope of effectiveness it states the unsubstantiable.
For instance, on many threads our senses have been described as only perceiving physical reality. However, this is proven by use of the Scientific Method which is self-limited to exploration of the physical reality. The glaring logical fallacy of this is something proponents of the Scientific Method as a panacea to the world's ignorance are loathe to admit.
I also choose hope.
Respectfully,
OldSoul
to show what we are really made of.
i have been going through extreme stress, almost disstress.
i will not reveal what it is at this time.
You need an uncritical ear to use as a sounding board. Most often, we can work through the worst possible stresses by talking it out, then allowing our brain to work on the issue a bit more, then talking it out some more. That process takes as long as it takes.
Sometimes, the ear can also have a helpful mouth. The advice from someone with an uncritical ear may inject a way of looking at an issue that our brains would not choose on its own. This can help us start to develop productive thought patterns we would not have arrived at alone that can make us more able to cope with stresses.
I apologize if our discussions added to your stress. I highly recommend not aggravating your stress levels in other areas if you recognize a weak ability to handle it currently.
Respectfully,
OldSoul
they make a huge deal over how the co is coming and we have to show appreciation for his visit.
did the co ever do anything special for you during his visit?
Yes. I can't elaborate yet, but that would be a definite yes.
OldSoul
