Posts by Rod P

179

I found a big ol' fat lie again in there!

by gumby in

some big fat liar made sumthin up again!

looky here what i went and found in the bible!

remember that little dove that desended down on jesus right after he was baptised by john?

Rod P

Narkissos:

I just submitted a rather lengthy post here to your attention, but it seems it did not arrive. If I can't find it, will have to redo it later.

Rod P.

179

I found a big ol' fat lie again in there!

by gumby in

some big fat liar made sumthin up again!

looky here what i went and found in the bible!

remember that little dove that desended down on jesus right after he was baptised by john?

Narkissos: The scriptures you refer to in Mark and Matthew do not reflect a "distinct tradition" that Jesus Christ and John the Baptist were NOT contemporaries. Your scriptural references must be placed in a proper time context in order to understand what they mean. Firstly, let's look at Mark 6: 7, 12-20 (RSV): vs.7 And he (Jesus) called to him the twelve, and began to send them out two by two, and gave them authority over the unclean spirits..... vs.12 So they went out and preached that men should repent vs.13 And they cast out many demons, and anointed with oil many that were sick and healed them. vs.14 King Herod heard of it; for Jesus' name had become known. Some said "John the Baptizer has been raised from the dead; that is why these powers are at work in him. (i.e. Jesus)" vs.15 But others said, "It is Elijah." And others said, "It is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old." vs.16 But when Herod heard of it he said, "John, whom I beheaded, has been raised." vs.17 For Herod had sent and seized John, and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife; because he had married her. vs.18 For John said to Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife." vs.19 And Herodias had a grudge against him, and wanted to kill him. But she could not, vs.20 for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. When he heard him, he was much perplexed; and yet he heard him gladly. Mark 8:27-28 says pretty much the same thing: vs.27 And Jesus went forth, and his disciples, into the villages of Caesarea Philippi: and on the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, Who do men say that I am? vs.28 And they told him, saying, John the Baptist, and others, Elijah; but others One of the Prophets. From these verses we get the picture that Jesus sent his disciples out two by two, and they went all over the country preaching and performing miracles. This would give Jesus a high profile, and he started to become known all over, and so word of Jesus reached Herod, who was tetrarch over Galilee. So, some thought Jesus was John the Baptist who was risen, and not just Herod thought that. Some thought Jesus was Elija or Elias since they expected he would come just in advance of the Messiah, and would be risen. Others considered Jesus a Prophet, expecially given his miracles; but certainly not the Messiah. Herod is thought to have visited Jerusalem to attend the Passover. At the same time, Herod had just quite recently murdered John the Baptist, who he was convinced was an innocent man and a prophet. At the same time a lot of his circumstances, such as war, were faring very badly, like it was a kind of punishment from God, perhaps because of what he did to John. In his guilt, he may have worried that this Jesus he had been hearing so many stories and miracles about, was John the Baptist risen from the dead. It is thought that Herod feared John had risen when he heard that Jesus was visiting Jerusalem for the Passover. Mark 6:14 must be understood on the basis that Herod had already beheaded John, albeit recently. All these verse are proving is that they were spoken at a time when John the Baptist had recently been killed. They in no way establish that Jesus and John were not contemporaries. John and Jesus were cousins, and John was six months older than Jesus. In their day, a male was not considered an adult until they reached the age of thirty. Therefore, that is when both Jesus and John commenced their ministries. The beginning of John's ministry preceded the beginning of Jesus' ministry by six months. The beginning of Jesus' ministry was when he was baptized by John. In the account I explained to Gumby above, after Jesus was baptized by John, went into the wilderness for 40 days (in Judea), then to the wedding in Cana (Galilee), he later went to the Passover Celebration in Jerusalem (Judea), departing from Capernaum (Galilee), which celebration occurred Nisan 8 (March 23). After that, Jesus and his disciples went out into Judea and preached about the Kingdom of God and baptized new believer. At the same time, John and his disciples were out there preaching and baptizing, but in a different area. During this period of several months, John was not yet arrested, and so at this time John and Jesus were contemporaries. Now, during this period, Jesus and John and their respective disciples preached for about 6 or 7 months, after chich John teh Baptist was arrested and imprisoned by Herod. When that happened, Jesus and his disciples removed themselves from Judea, and went back to Galilee. Jesus' ministry continued, and he called his 12 apostles about one week before the 2nd Passover of his ministry (Nissan 14, or April 17 of that year). It was also shortly before this Passover Celebration that John the Baptist was beheaded. (Some claim it was in August) We could get into a lengthy treatise on these timelines with comparative chronologies from different sources. The point I am trying to make here is that all these scriputures we are examining need to be understood within the flow of events which happened over a significant period of time. After John was beheaded, Jesus continued on with his ministry for quite some time (about another yearO before being crucified. When Jesus arrived in Jerusalem to celebrate the 2nd Passover of his ministry, Jesus mentioned John the Baptist in the past tense, as though he were already dead: John 5:35 "He was the lamp that was burning and shining and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light" So when you read:Matthew 11:12-14: vs.12 "From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingom of heaven has suffered violence, and men of violence take it by force. vs.13 "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John, vs.14 and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come." How are we to understand this? "From the days of John the Baptist until now" means from the time of the beginning of John the Baptist to the time that Jesus was giving this sermon on the kingdom of God (a period of about 3 years). ".....the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and men of violence take it by force." This is an analogy that God's Kingdom is like a besieged city, where men try to force an entrance, to enter prematurely. These people had preconceived ideas of this Kingdom, and they were trying to force the Kingdom to come and to blossum, instead of waiting for God's timing and keys for entering. "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John". If we study the Old Testament, we see the work of a long series of prophets all prophesying of the coming of the Messiah and the Kingom of God. John the Baptist was at the end of this line, and his message was not prophecy, but rather an announcement that the Kingdom of God was at hand. So the point here is that Matthew 11:12 does NOT prove that Jesus and John were not contemporaries. Jesus and John were contemporaries except that in the middle of their two ministries, with concurrent and overlapping activities, John got beheaded. Jesus simply marked time from the period of John's ministry to Jesus' present when he delivered that statement, even though John died during that period. Some say it is "from the beginning of John's ministry" while others say "from the time that John had fulfilled his ministry." Either way, this does not nullify the argument that this scripture does NOT prove that they weren't contemporaries. Too many people are too willing to claim Biblical contradictions by putting Synoptic passages side-by-side and then making it look like the writers are all talking about the same time and the same event, when, in fact, they are not. Similarly, Narkissos, you are taking Mark and Matthew and citing them on the basis that Jesus was referring to John the Baptist in the past tense, and Herod was referring to John the same way, while Jesus was yet alive (i.e. not yet crucified), and then claiming that therefore proves Jesus and John were not contemporaries. I feel that is somewhat fallacious reasoning. LOL, Rod P.

179

I found a big ol' fat lie again in there!

by gumby in

some big fat liar made sumthin up again!

looky here what i went and found in the bible!

remember that little dove that desended down on jesus right after he was baptised by john?

Rod P

Hey Gumby! Hey People!

Is anybody out there?

Don't all die at once! This was the hottest thread going. Suddenly, silence! Why?

LOL

Rpd P.

179

I found a big ol' fat lie again in there!

by gumby in

some big fat liar made sumthin up again!

looky here what i went and found in the bible!

remember that little dove that desended down on jesus right after he was baptised by john?

Rod P

Hey, guys!

I sign off a lot of my posts with "LOL". I thought it meant "Lots of Love".

My daughter just informed me that "LOL" means "Laughing Out Loud"

Oops! Be assured, I am not Laughing Out Loud when signing off!

Regards!

Oh hell, LOL,

Rod P.

31

X-JW , X-Mormon & More OR: Around the World's Religions in 60 Years!

by Rod P in

hi people!

i am new here, but started out on the topic of "high rates of depression in org.

" there are 3 posts, one of which has been pasted below on my new thread.

Rod P

Episode #6

One weekend there was a Calgary District Assembly which the wife and I attended. There was a talk on a Saturday morning after which we prepared to do field service. There were a number of us who got together in a car pool, and we were going to go to a territory in our 1949 Ford and offer magazines. One young lady asked if she could please join us, to which we said "Yes." I immediately saw two "Elders" come up to her, pull her aside, and proceed to scold her for talking to us, since it turned out she was disfellowshipped. She apologized, and just stood there crying, while looking at us longingly. I looked back at her, lip-synching "I'm sorry!", and away we went. I remember feeling very sorry for her, being all alone and trying to reach out for some companionship. I could feel her pain, and it just didn't feel right to treat anyone that way. It was hard to comprehend that this was "love" from Jehovah's "Loving Organization". This was the first time I actually watched Disfellowshipment in action, and I was not impressed.

In the congregation we attended, I was appointed as Magazine-Territory Servant. My predecessor told me that much needed to be done to organize things, and that some existing territories were too small, while others were way too big for one or two persons to take care of effectively. The first thing I did was go to City Hall and purchase two sets of large-scale maps of the whole downtown area, since these were the boundaries of our congregation. Every single block was shown in detail, even the individual Lots within each block, all of the road allowances and, of course, all the streets and avenues were clearly named. Then we walked around every block and counted the individual residences and businesses. Also, the downtown core had a number of high-rise apartments, and these too were quantified. From there, we were able to determine the appropriate size and boundaries for each territory. Then I mounted one of the maps on a large 4 ft. by 8 ft. board, and drew outlines around each territory which were quite visible from 6 ft. away. Now when someone came to me for a territory, they could easily point out the one they wanted, and then receive the assignment. With the second map, I cut up the individual territories and mounted them on cards, gave them a territory number (which I also inserted on the Big Board Map), and put them in a Card File Box in numerical order. This whole project probably took about 60 - 70 hours work over the course of a month. This whole system was designed to allow individuals to select a territory, receive their assignment and get a copy of their own territory map, while at the same time keeping a record on hand as to who had which territory at any point in time, much like a public library handles books for check-ins and check-outs. This seemed to work quite well, and everyone seemed happy with the system. Then the Circuit Servant visited the congregation. He interviewed each one in a position of leadership. When he looked at the Magazine-Territory Servant, and the way things had been done, his advice was "Your time would have been better spent out in the field service." I did not say anything, but the lesson I learned was "Never do your best at anything, unless it has to do with field service."

After a few months went by, we were visiting the wife's parents on the farm. We were told that the farm-hands were let go, and the sons were old enough now to handle all the work. This left the house they were living in vacant. It was an opportunity for us to live on the farm, a kind of childhood dream come true for me, and a chance for June to be close to her parents and brothers. At the time I had a job interview with a lawyer in Brooks (15 miles from the farm) and he needed an office accountant, and would also train the person he hired on how to do legal collections. He offered me the position with the same income I was earning in Calgary plus commissions on amounts I could bring in from collections. We were very excited, and a month later we moved to the farm. I drove to-and-from work. And, of course, we're now living where a lot of Mormons are too. We all felt very close to each other, like one big happy family!

In field service I encountered a number of these Mormons and had a number of intereesting discussions with them. The questions of having the Authority to Preach came up a lot, so decided to pursue this whole matter. Over the years I had collected a lot fo the older Watchtowers and Awakes, books and booklets, etc, including material from the Rutherford and Russell eras. Then along came the 30-year comprehensive Index to Watchtower Publications. With this tool, I was able to research pretty well any question or topic and find it from the publications that were on hand. When it came to Mormonism and the question of Authority, I was able to find pretty well anything the Society had written on these topics. Of course, Mormons are not the only ones to claim an exclusive authority from God. The Catholic Church makes it s claim to that Authority on the basis of Apostolic Succession. "Thou art Peter (petros), and upon this Rock (petra) I will build my church."

Why was the question of Authority becoming such a priority to me? A few years earlier, back in Medicine Hat, there was an assembly at which the booklet "The Word, Who is He According to John?" was released. Around about this time, there was an article in the Watchtower about "Subjection to Superior Authorities", based on the scripture at Romans 13:1 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God. The powers that be are ordained of God." (KJV)

Back in the time of Rutherford and the Second World War, there were a lot of male JW's who ended up in court for not going to war. As a defense, these Witnesses used the scripture at Romans 13:1. The Governing Body's interpretation at the time was that these "Higher Powers" (or what the JW's now called the "Superior Authorities") were none other than Jehovah God and Christ Jesus. In other words, this was their justification for taking their stand against the war. Their subjection was to Jehovah God and Christ Jesus, and NOT to the earthly governments and rulers, or civil authority. The courts brought in members of the clergy, experts in the languages of the Bible and interpretation of scripture, who pointed out that the "Higher Powers" in this scripture were, in fact, the earthly govenments and rulers, and therefore when that authority tells you to go to war against tyranny, then we should obey. But the JW's, of course, were not going to accept their interpretation, because these clergy were part of the world-wide empire of false religion known as "Babylon the Great", and were in the hands of Satan the Devil, the god of this world or "System of Things". And so these JW brethren went to jail.

Now fast forward about 20 years,. Now the Governing Body has this "New Truth" that the "Higher Powers" (or "Superior Authorities" in the NWT) are, in fact, the earthly governments and rulers, and NOT Jehovah God and Christ Jesus as they had taught previously. They then went on to quote other scriptures to show that our subjection to these "Superior Authorities" is a Relative Subjection, so that our subjection can only be so long as their laws do not conflict with God's laws. To the extent man's laws are in conflict with God's laws, then in such instances we must obey God's higher laws rather than that of the Superior Authorities. But this does NOT deal with the real issue here. Nobody, including the clergy, would argue that where men's laws are in contradiction of God's higer laws, we must obey God's before man's laws. However, the question I had at the time, and still have, is: How is it that these so-called evil clergy, as part of this "Babylon the Great", this world-wide empire of false religion under the control of Satan the Devil, possessed this "New Truth" years in advance.of the Governing Body who Jehovah supposedly inspired and revealed this New Truth exclusively to them? Is the Devil revealing Truth to his clergy years in advance of Jehovah revealing the same Truth to his Faithful and Discreet Servant, the Governing Body? Impossible!!! The real Truth is, the Society was wrong in the first place, and then later had to correct their interpretation of scripture, which was simply a "catch-up" to what the clergy and Biblical schollars already knew years earlier. And this is only ONE example of many that could be cited to demonstrate the problem with the Governing Body's claim to "progressive revelation".

After having had quite a few discussions with Mormons along the way, it was becoming clear that one did have to have proper and legitimate Authority to act and preach in the name of God. This would serve as a sign, a proof, that you were receiving and being taught the correct interpretation of scripture, insofar as it is correctly translated. I had learned that merely appealing to the Bible itself to "prove" what the Bible teaches is a fallacy that cannot be successfully maintained. Here's why: Suppose you had two persons of equal intelligence (say 190 I.Q.) who took the identical scripture that had doctrinal implications. Give them the same library research materials, and give them the same amount of time (say 6 months). However, one individual belongs to one religion, and the second belongs to another religion, and these two religions teach opposing interpretations on that particular scripture. So these people, having faith in the Bible and in the teachings of their respective churches, begin to do their research. However, they tend to start from the position of their own Church, and then go on to try to prove it true. In other words, "Believing is seeing!" Because they believe a certain way to begin with, their research efforts will tend to be from the standpoint of proving "true" the very interpretation of their own Church. So at the end of six months, you put these two individuals in a room and let them debate the issue. In the end, each one will think and believe they are right and the other person is wrong, so that neither one "proves" anything to anyone. And even if one person did convince the other person that his/her interpretation was right and the other person's was wrong, what would this prove? It would simply show that the one person was perhaps a little more skilled in debating over the other person. In the final analysis, it proves absolutely nothing of a certainty, except that there is a difference of opinion. We may well be simply fooling ourselves that we have the infallibly correct interpretation of scripture. The fact that there are so many different religions that believe in the same book, the Bible, and yet doctrinally disagree with each other, certainly demonstrates that we need more than just the Bible itself to arrive at the "whole Truth" and "nothing but the Truth" from the Bible. The sad part is, that there are quite a number of these "Christian" churches or organizations that say your very own Eternal Salvation rests upon you making the right decision about embracing the "Truth" from the Bible. Which "Truth"? God help the human race if eternal Salvation is dependent upon our intellectual capacity and prowess!

True Story: There was one woman years ago who became what is known as a "Professional Joiner". She had listened to the messages of truth from the Bible from representatives of several professed Christian organizations. They all told her she needed to make a choice, and her eternal salvation depended upon it. She could not make up her mind who was right and who was wrong. So she joined all these different Churches, and belonged to all of them at the same time. When asked why she did that, she replied that she did not want to make the wrong choice, so if she joined all of them, then surely one of them would be the Right Church, and so her Eternal Salvation would be assured. How funny! How sad!

And I was beginning to discover from experience that there were quite a number of teachings from the Watchtower Society that were debatable, even questionable. Of course, that made me guilty of "independent thought", which is not allowed. How dare you question the Governing Body?

Speaking of questioning doctrines. As an example, there is the "Soul Doctrine" which I talked about in a previous episode. One thing that did not make sense to me was" If, when we die, we go out of existence, our bodies go back to the "dust of the earth" and our "spirit" or "life force" goes back to the God who gave it. The publications taught that everything that was "US" when we were alive,our personality, our memories of all our experiences, etc. goes back to Jehovah God who has a perfect memory or recollection of all that we were. Then, in the resurrection, God makes a new body, and implants everything of his memory of us from when we were alive into that new body, and this then becomes "You" in resurrected form. But this really ISN'T "You"; it is only a duplicate, a replica, a "clone" of you. The real "You" went out of existence when you died. So, once you go out of existence thru death, what do you care whether you get resurrected or not? I mean really, why should you even care? And why even worry whether you are going to make it thru the Battle of Armageddon and into God's New World? When you die, you no longer exist! That's why I began to seriously doubt the Watchtower Society's teaching on the doctrine of the Soul. If there is an after-life, then there simply MUST be a continuity of existence. Annhilation just makes no sense to me!

These are the seed thoughts that were simmering on the back-burners of my brain, and were starting to percolate to the surface, motivating me to try and answer the question: Which religion has the true Authority from God to act and speak in His Name? Find the answer to that, and I will find the religion or channel thru which God is revealing the correct interpretation of the Scriptures, thru their inspired leaders.

In my next Episode, I will try to explain how I dealt with this whole issue, and where this led me to as a consequence.

179

I found a big ol' fat lie again in there!

by gumby in

some big fat liar made sumthin up again!

looky here what i went and found in the bible!

remember that little dove that desended down on jesus right after he was baptised by john?

Rod P

Well Gumby, I'm back, as promised. I want to deal with your claim that "The Gospel accounts differ as to the timing of John's imprisonment." You are mistaken on this. The answer lies in looking at the Mark 1:14-17 and John 1:40-44 accounts more closely, and within th proper time frames.

But before we do this, I want you to do something. Stretch out your right arm and point your index finger at something. Now notice that there are three more fingers pointing right back at you (i.e your own). The analogy here is, be careful when we point our finger at something or someone with an accusation or claim. If it turns out to be false, then we are three times as guilty by our own hand. "Judge not, lest you yourself be judged."

Now, a word about the "Burden of Proof". You have, in effect, said that the Bible contradicts itself when it comes to the books of Mark and John respecting the timing of John's imprisonment. If I can demonstrate to you that there is a logical, plausible and reasonable explanation that the two accounts do not contradict each other, then the Burden of Proof passes to you that you have to prove that they do. The only way either one of us can make a case, one way or the other, is with a "preponderance of the evidence".

So here goes.

Firstly, it wouldn't hurt to take a lesson in Geography. Spend a few minutes looking at some maps of the areas where John the Baptist and Jesus conducted their ministries. There is a pretty good map of the Land of Palestine in New Testament times at the following site: www.ccel.org

Notice the scale of the map, then use a ruler to determine how far apart different location are from each other. For example, John the Baptist set up his headquarters near Jericho, which John 1:28 says was "At the River Jordan, near Bethany-across-the-Jordan, or Bethabara." This was just north of the Dead Sea. The River Jordan connects straight north to the Sea of Galilee, a distance of approximately 65 miles "as the crow flies". The next thing to notice is how Palestine was divided up. In the North was the area of Galilee, where Jesus lived and spent most of his time during his ministry. South of Galilee is the territory of Samaria, and still further South is the land of Judea. Judea is where Jerusalem is located, and Bethlehem where Jesus was born, and also where John baptised and his disciples focused their activities. Jesus grew up in Nazareth, which appears to be about 20 miles west of the southern tip of the Sea of Galilee. Cana is less than 10 miles north of Nazareth. So when Jesus travelled from his home in Galilee to John in Judea to get baptised by John, he had to travel about 65 miles South. And when Jesus came out of the Wilderness after 40 days, and he saw John the Baptist who had been meeting with the priests and Levistes from Jerusalem, and he went to the wedding at Cana three days later, Jesus had to travel North and then West about 75 miles total. In those days, most people walked everywhere. That must have been some hike for 3 days under that hot, desert sun! Do you see now how geography can put things in better perspective?

When Jesus met John the Baptist after coming out of the Wilderness, and met Andrew and Cephas (Peter) and then Philip (as well as Nathaniel) John 1:14 says: "Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter." Bethsaida is located at the northern tip of the Sea of Galilee on lake Genesareth. This suggests that these guys accompanied Jesus on the way to the wedding at Cana, but really, they were on their way back home to Bethsaida. Remember too, that Andrew and Peter were fishermen, and they fished in the Sea of Galilee, so they lived where they worked.

It was after the wedding in Cana that Jesus, his mother, his brothers and his disciples went to Capernaum (about 15 miles east, on the N.W. end of the Sea of Galilee) and stayed there for a few days (John 2:12). Now it was the Jewish New Year on Nisan 1 (i.e. March 16), and on Nisan 8 (March 23) the Jewish Passover was celebrated. Jesus went down to Jerusalem (about 95 miles South and West from Capernaum) to celebrate the Passover, and that was when he cleansed the Temple of the buyers and the sellers (John 2:13-16). Then after this, Jesus and his disciples went into the land of Judea, and preached and baptised people (John 3:22). Remember, this is also John's territory for his work. John 3:22 tells us that at this time, John the Baptist was baptising at Aenon near Salem (which is believed to be in the heart of the Jordan valley). It is at this point that John 3:24 tells us "FOR JOHN HAD NOT YET BEEN PUT IN PRISON." For the next several months, Jesus disciples and John the Baptist were separately baptising in JUDEA.

It was some months later (one Chronology has it in November of the same year as the Passover Jesus attended in Jerusalem) that John was arrested. (Mark 1:14; Luke 3:14). Mark 1:14 says: "NOW AFTER JOHN WAS ARRESTED, Jesus came into GALILEE preaching the gospel of God.....". Luke 3:14 explained why John was arrested: "But Harod the tretarch, who had been reproved by him for Herodias, his brother's wife, and for all the evil that Harod had done."

Let me reiterate: "AFTER JOHN WAS ARRESTED, JESUS CAME INTO GALILEE" Jesus did this when he heard that John had been imprisoned. It makes perfect sense that when John got arrested, that Jesus and his disciples would remove themselves from the area of Judea where Harod was, and go back to their home territory. For the next six months, Jesus and his disciples spent most of their time in the area of Galilee, with short visits to Tyre and Sidon, north of Galilee, and the area of Decapolis, east of Galilee where 4,000 were fed.

It was during this period in Galilee that Jesus called his disciples:

"And passing along by the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew the brother of Simon casting a net in the sea; for they were fishermen."

"And Jesus said to them: 'Follow me and I will make you become fishers of men' " (Mark 1:16,17)

By one Chronology, this occurred March 12, about 4 or 5 months after the arrest of John the Baptist. Then, by the same Chronology, on April 3 (some 3 weeks later) Jesus selected the 12 apostles:

"And he went up on the mountains, and called to him those whom he desired; and they came to him."

"And he appointed twelve, to be with him, and to be sent out to preach." (Mark 3:13, 14)

While Jesus had been preaching to "come, follow me" and he had a number of disciples or followers, it was at this time when he appointed the 12 apostles that this effectively became a call to preach and teach and baptize FULL-TIME.

So, to the question "Where was John the Baptist when Jesus chose Andrew and Peter?", the answer is "In prison", if you mean when he chose them as amongst the 12 Apostles for full-time work. John was also in prision when Jesus told them "Follow me and I will make you become fishers of men", because they were in Galilee at the time. On the other hand, what about when Jesus came out of the wilderness and saw John the Baptist, and met Andrew and Peter and Philip, and told Philip "Follow me."? Then John was not in prison, because they were in Judea, and they all had to return to Galilee, and then Jesus had to come back to Judea to celebrate the Passover in Jerusalem, and work with his disciples in Judea for a period of time, and then later go back to Galilee when he heard that John had been arrested. It was after all this that Jesus chose his 12 apostles IN GALILEE.

I would now refer you to an excellent site for the New Testament Chronology which I have been referring to. You could literally spend days there, as it gets into tons of dating issues and theories, and why his dates were, in the end, selected. Even if you prefer another Chronology that doesn't agree precisely with his dates, it seems pretty clear that there is a kind of relative progression or sequencing of events that are pretty consistent from one system to another. The site is: doig.net Also, to demonstrate the "Harmony of the Ministry of Jesus" (in terms of Chronology) it lists all of the events that transpired in a chart, and to the right, three side-by-side columns for Mark, Luke and John, and cites chapter and verse where each passage tells about the event. There is one other Chronology that is pretty good that can be found at mb-soft.com that is worth looking at.

Having said all of the above, I would also like to say that most of my difficulties with the Bible have to do with quite a large number of EXTERNAL evidences (eg. historical, scientific, archaeogical, anthropological, etc.) rather than disprove many of the things written in the Bible in terms of comparing one passage with another to show a contradiction.I have already alluded to some of them earlier. However, when it comes to all these so-called contradictions within the Bible itself, I find them more apparent than real. I would rather take the position that "the Bible is logical and consistent within itself" and then test it against external evidences. There lie the real questions and problems, as I see it.

This has been a real learning experience for me, and I do hope it is of some use to other readers here as well.

Over to you, Gumby.

LOL,

RodP

31

X-JW , X-Mormon & More OR: Around the World's Religions in 60 Years!

by Rod P in

hi people!

i am new here, but started out on the topic of "high rates of depression in org.

" there are 3 posts, one of which has been pasted below on my new thread.

Rod P

To Jaypeeto:

Sorry to hear about your nervous breakdown over the JW thing. I believe that one of the reasons people get to such a state inside the JW Organization (and many other religions or cults as well) is that people who are attracted to faith and religion are usually much more sensitive than most. This is because they aspire towards being loving, meek, gentle and peaceful, and strive to be good and try to be "more perfect". They are not equipped to handle pressures and censorship and disapprovals and chastisements and crises. And when you are a JW, they are your whole life, your whole support network. If you lose that support, it can lead to some very real mental, psychological and spiritual dilemmas, even breakdowns.

I know that a lot of Mormon teachings can be a real struggle to accept. Stay tuned, and I will share with you why Mormons accept these things by faith, often quite readily, and how I ended up questioning the entire system.

My struggle in faith and religion has never been over the sincere, well-meaning followers of the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons. My beefs have always focused on the Leadership, the ones that teach and control all this, while you and I are virtually expected to just blindly accept it, and don't question and challenge anything, and pretty well keep your mouth shut or else there will be some real consequences to follow. In other words, never question their Authority....or else!

I see by your "Profile" that you spent time with the Presbyterians and more recently became affiliated with the Catholic Church. Before I became a Mormon, I delved into the Catholic Church to quite an extent. It became an issue of Mormons vs. Catholics. You may find this of interest in one of my upcoming Episodes (soon to come).

I hope you are finding life peaceful, enjoyable and fulfilling these days.

LOL,

Rod P.

179

I found a big ol' fat lie again in there!

by gumby in

some big fat liar made sumthin up again!

looky here what i went and found in the bible!

remember that little dove that desended down on jesus right after he was baptised by john?

Rod P

To: Flying High Now:

I just wanted to say "Thank you, for posting that rather thought-provoking article on Jehovah Unmasked". I shall be getting into it pretty seriously in the days ahead. Looks like it is quite informative. Am having some difficulty, though, accepting the premise that Jehovah is actually Satan.

Regards!

Rod P.

179

I found a big ol' fat lie again in there!

by gumby in

some big fat liar made sumthin up again!

looky here what i went and found in the bible!

remember that little dove that desended down on jesus right after he was baptised by john?

Rod P

Hello Gumby!

No, I am not yet ready to try and answer the contradiction you brought up. But I'm working on it.

However, I have to jump in here with a few observations.

There seems to be a lot of posters following your thread that are pretty cynical, even bitter, about the God of the Bible. You all sound like you have some kind of deep down pain inside as to the bad ol' God who treats his creatures so mean. I'll bet if you met God face to face (Yeah, I know, "Assuming there is a God") and He threatened you with your own destruction, you would probably raise your fist at him defiantly, as you were cast into oblivion.

YOU ARE whatever bothers you! As most of us have all been disfellowshipped by the WT Organization, we probably went off and contemplated a lot about our fates and how we had been treated. Many of us became very bitter, even hostile. Many of us also became cynical, and decided not to believe in anything, let alone what the Society had been feeding us "all these years". Further, a great many of us went off and did an awful lot of research from sources outside the WT. And of course, there was that handy-dandy Internet, which I understand the Witnesses are now calling "the devil's playground". We discovered a whole new world of alternative ideas, alternative interpretations, and also one immense pile of articles about all the Cults, JW's being one of them. We were "arming ourselves to the teeth" ready to take on that bad old JW Organization who wrecked our lives. And of course, now anything goes! There's no-one there anymore to tell you what you can or cannot read. So we launched ourselves into this Cornucopia of ideas and opinions, including Atheist sites, etc. I suspect, Gumby, you revelled in that "playground", and, of course, they just love to bash God and the Bible. With their parodies and puns, they loved to insult God, to point out his vengefulness, his jealosies, his unjustices and his murderous ways. Of course, we being his creatures, God just loved to play with us, and sometimes He just got tired of us all and squashed us like bugs (eg. the Flood). So, I want to say that I understand a bit of what "makes you tick, and what you must be going thru, because I can relate and share a lot of what you all are feeling.

But you also know, or at least I hope you do, that life is still worth while, and we do not necessarily have to give up and turn into unhappy skeptics with an axe to grind. There are times I have felt like that. Then I would go for a long walk in a beautiful park and smell the flowers, and watch the birds, and listen to the wind in the trees, and the surf on the ocean, and watch the sunset at dusk and the moon and stars on a clear night, and my sense of awe and wonderment would return. How can all this just happen from some "big bang" billions of years ago, and then all life in the Universe sprang into being out of pure random chance probability. And let's say that that first cell of life came into being, Now it had to find enough food of the right kind in order to live. What are the chances of those two things (life and food to sustain it) randomly happening together at the same time. It boggles the mind what the Atheist would ask us to swallow! That is why I think and believe there is a God behind this Universe. And yet, having gotten into the debate as to whether there is a "First Cause" or not, I know that one cannot PROVE that there is a God or that there is not a God. It becomes a matter of personal choice as to what you believe. On the other hand, I am reminded of the expression "There are no atheists in the fox holes."

In terms of the Bible, I too have many problems and issues about it. I seriously question the story of the Flood, because when it talks about the whole world being buried in water above even the highest mountain, the amount of water that would require just doesn't make sense. Where would that much water come from? (Yeah, I know the WT talks about the water canopy that was above the earth, but I still question it. Will get into this on another thread.) Also, some recent archeological findings show a very plausible explanation of the flood taking place in the area of the Black Sea, and that the people who lived there regarded this as the "whole world". Today we would say "the whole KNOWN world. There is a big difference. I will be getting into the whole flood question at a later date.

In terms of the Bible, I have a problem with the two accounts of Creation in Genesis 1 and 2. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that the account was taken from the Epic of Gilgamesh, rather than attributing the authorship to Moses. More on that later.

In terms of the Bible, I have a problem with the "anthropomorphic" concept of deity. It seems that God or Jehovah of the Old Testament is cast in the light of being almost "human" with all of our emotions of love, hate, jealousy, lust for power, etc. And, of course, God is at the top of the food chain. Well, I think that man has made God in man's image, rather than God having made man in God's image. Therein is the real problem with all these things that God has purportedly done to His creatures. Could it be that things "happened" to the Israelites, who then put their own "spin" on the story, rationalizing how and why God did so and so to them. If they lost, it was because they had turned away from God, or practiced idolatry, or did sinful acts, etc, etc,- so God had to punish them. If they were winning in some of those battles, then it was God that caused the victories and blessed His Chosen People.

In terms of the Bible, I have as much difficulty with how the many books ended up being included in the Bible, as I do with all of the other books worthy of equal consideration that ended up being rejected as uninspired and not of God. I think this "choosing" was more about politics and power and control over the masses, that motivated those who were in a position to vote which ones should be included in the Bible and which ones shouldn't. Did you know that the Book of Revelation made it into the Bible by a "majority vote" of just ONE Vote; that's how close it came to not being included in the Bible. Now, if some documents had content that was not in total agreement with certain doctrines or teachings of other books that were already accepted as Scripture, then they pronounced it as uninspired and rejected it. Hold on there guys! Not so fast! Let's have another look at the things you have rejected. That's why I will have a lot to say about the Gnostics, especially the Gospel of Thomas, which I dearly love. It teaches that we do not need a Church or Organization to find God.

So you see, Gumby, I hear what you are saying when you point out contradictions in the Bible, and call them "Big Fat Lies". The problem is, this comes across as being from someone who is "bitter", and maybe that is sending the wrong message. I entered your little game about John and Mark, and I am still playing with it. But I am not the kind of "Defender of the Faith" that I see "A Christian" is. At the same time, I am playing the game with you because my message to you is to "Be careful, you do not become guilty of erecting a 'straw man', and then proceeding to tear it apart." That would be doing the wrong thing for the wrong reason, even though in the "bigger picture" you may be correct in destroying the "Image" of the mythical version of God as portrayed in the O.T., or at least of what the JW's and other Church Organizations say is being taught in the Bible.

I would also caution that we do not do what a lot of atheists do, when they try to destroy the idea of God and the Bible (and, of course) ALL Religion at any cost. But in doing so, they become like that piece of Mercury we used to play with in high school chemistry class. You put the mercury on the counter, and you try to touch it; it moves over there. You touch it again, and it moves over here. You can never pin it down, because it never stays in one place. It is simply elusive. Now, when you bring up an issue from the Bible, and others enter the discussion, and actually establish a few good points, maybe even demonstrate that your premise is wrong, or your facts are inaccurate, or your reasoning is faulty, etc., then rather than accept or acknowledge that, you introduce a whole new topic that swerves everyone off the topic, thereby taking the "heat" off you. This is what I mean about turning into a piece of Mercury when participating in a debate. That is not fair, and it is being elusive. Having said that, I am also very aware that a lot of Christian apologists are every bit as guilty of the very same tactics when they enter into discussion and debate. The only difference is, they must prove God and the Bible at any cost, and so the end justifies the means. So my advice here is that this applies equally to people on both sides of a debate. Just like in Parliament, there are what are called "Rules of Order" which are designed to keep things fair and equal opportunity for all sides. Enough said!

One more thing! Any philosophy that cannot be taken out in the sunshine once in a while and had a good laugh over it, isn't worth keeping. So, if shit were wit, we ought to be able to "laugh it off"!

LOL

Rod P.

31

X-JW , X-Mormon & More OR: Around the World's Religions in 60 Years!

by Rod P in

hi people!

i am new here, but started out on the topic of "high rates of depression in org.

" there are 3 posts, one of which has been pasted below on my new thread.

Rod P

Episode #5

The phone started ringing off the hook, and mom was the one who usually answered the phone. People from all over Medicine Hat and Redcliff were calling and asking "Is that your son I read about in the paper, getting baptised as a JW?" At first mom said she didn't know anything about it because I never said anything to her. When she asked me and I confirmed that I did get baptised, she got very upset and told me about all the phone calls, and how embarrassing it all was, because she had to find out second-hand from others. I tried to apologise, explaining that I just didn't know think it was such a bid deal, and she and dad did not seeem to be interested in anything I was doing with the Witnesses. After that, things went from bad to worse.

As a JW, I settled into the work of field service. One Saturday we were in a car filled with six witnesses, travelling in the countryside and knocking on farmhouse doors. It was Magazine day, so we were offering Watchtowers and Awakes. We came to the door of a guy who despised JW's. It was my turn, and someone in the car warned me about him. I went to the door with a companion beside me. I did the talking, and introduced ourselves as "members of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society". As I was talking, I could see he was pretty agitated. He said he was not interested, so we politely left and went back to the car. As we were preparing to drive away, the guy stomped out of his house, and jumped into his pick-up truck that was parked about 30 feet from where we were. A little boy, who looked about three years old, was sitting in the dirt right behind the left rear wheel of the truck, digging with a spoon. We all sat there in our car, staring at this unbelievable scene unfolding before our eyes, as the guy backed up his truck and ran over his little boy. It happened so fast there was no time to react, and that wqs the last thing anyone would have expected. Realizing what he had just done, he immediately jumped out of his trunk, scooped up his son and jumped back in his truck, and stormed off at a high rate of speed. No doubt he was now rushing to the hospital in town. We were all pretty shook up, and I felt an overwhelming sense of guilt that maybe I had triggered the whole thing, hurting this small child. If he hated JW's before, imagine how much he hated us now. This incident haunts me to this day, and I often wonder if that boy made out OK.

A short while later, I took a one-week vacation from the bank. At the assembly where I got baptised, I had met a guy whose name was Lee H. We became friends, and he lived in the town of Brooks, about 70 miles west of Medicine Hat, and he invited me to stay at his place. I decided to go Pioneering on my one-week vacation, and so I travelled to Brooks by Greyhound bus, and stayed with my new-found friend.It was fun, and this was the first time I had ever been away from home on my own. The congregation in Brooks was small (about 40) and I found everyone quite freindly. One of the Witnesses, Otto H., was a Reflexologist, who worked from his home, and patients would book appointments in advance. This gave him a lot of flexibility, as he could set his own hours and days for working. This enabled him to do field service on other days, which is why he became a full-time Pioneer, meaning at least 150 hours of field service a month. So while Lee was at work, I went around with Otto H, pioneering together.

Brooks was a town of about 3,000 people. Within a radius of 30 miles there were a number of smaller towns, each with a population of a few hundred (some even smaller). About 15 miles north and west of Brooks were the small towns of Rosemary and Duchess. In this rural area there lived a lot of Mormons and Mennonites, and the odd Japanese Buddhist. Years earlier all this land had been given to the Canadian Pacific Railroad (CPR) by the Government of Canada. In order to develop communities all along the railroad, the CPR offered the land for sale at $1.00 per acre to anyone who was willing to become a homesteader here. This attracted a lot of people to the area. The land was a vast prairie, which meant dry-land farming. To minimize risk against crop failures, and also to increase crop yields, they built the world's longest aqueduct running from the town of Bassano 30 mile west of Brooks, running straight past Brooks, and on to the town of Tilley, some 20 miles east of Brooks. This was built in the 1920's, and in its day, was an engineering marvel. This allowed the whole region to be irrigated with a reliable and controlled water supply. The Bow River wound south from the City of Calgary, which then fed into this aqueduct. Every so many miles the water would be released into head-ditches, which would feed down main canals, and then branch off to the various sections of farmland. This whole area became known as the Eastern Irrigation District (E.I.D.) and geographically was called the County of Newell. In the early years, when Brooks was first established, the town was named after its first Mayor- Mr. Brooks, who imported all kinds of trees and plants and planted them in the area. That is why Brooks and the surrounding area is so beautiful with countless deciduous trees everywhere you look, like an oasis in the desert.

This is where I did my Pioneering work. A number of JW's lived on farms in the County, and would drive into Brooks for the meetings at the Kingdom Hall. I was able to visit a number of these people on their farms. This brought back memories of my childhood when I lived on the farm with the Fishers. I fell in love with the area! As we knocked on doors, I met a number of Mennonites who, while they were polite, they were just not interested in listening to the messages of JW's. Mormons, however, loved to get into discussions. At one door, I met a Noel C. who was a school teacher, married with a family, and a former Mormon missionary. He was very well-versed in the Bible, and was very skilled in debating. He listened to my presentation (I was alone at his door.) Suddenly, he asked me where I got my authority to preach, because unless I could demonstrate that I had that authority, I had no right to be going around preaching religion to others. I told him this was a very good subject, and would like to come back again when we could discuss this matter more thoroughly. The truth was, I needed to be better prepared when up against someone with this level of knowledge and sophistication at articulating his points of view. Of course, as a JW, we relied on the Bible as God's Word, which would lead us to an understanding of the "Truth" The Bible was our authority, because we were preaching what the Bible said. At a subsequent meeting with Noel C. I explained our position on Authority. What he then told me, threw me for a loop. He said that there are many religions preaching and teaching from that same book, the Bible. Also, there are hundreds of translations of the Bible, and they don't all agree on every verse, especially those that have doctrinal implications. How then, can you be sure that you have the correct interpretation of Scripture? How do you know for sure that the other guy, or the other Church doesn't have the correct interpretation of the Scriptures, on this or that doctrine? Isn't it just a matter of opinion or debate as to who is right and who is wrong? On the other hand, if you can demonstrate that your Church was given the Authority from God to act or speak in His Name, then and only then, can you know that your interpretation is correct. I told him that the Bible teaches "By their fruits you shall know them." He countered that there are many Churches with many men and women who have the Christian "fruits" (faith, hope and charity, etc.) and live exemplary lives that would rival any of the JW's. So this is not necessarily a proof of Authority. Noel C. went on to explain that it was the Priesthoold that was the Authority from God. In Old Testament days, they had the Aaronic Priesthood, and the Priesthhod after the order of Melchizedek. One would not dare to speak for God unless one was ordained of the Priesthood. This was a very sobering experience for me, and left me baffled. What if he was right? I would have to dig into this subject further, to not only prove that Mormons did not have that authority, but that JW's did. I knew it was going to take some time to resolve this issue, and I only had a one-week vacation, and all my books were at home.

Anyway, one day we paid a visit to the farm of the "D. family" They were devout JW's, although the parents originally had been "converts". At the time, they had one daughter, age 18, and four younger brothers, all being raised in the "Truth". They attended school in the town of Rosemary, two miles from the farm. They were the only JW's in the school, where a couple of Buddhist kids also attended. The rest of the kids were either Mennonite or Mormon. The "D" kids often felt singled out and picked on by a lot of the Mormon kids, who behaved like "brats", and thought they were "It!". This made them stick together as JW's, and they were very loyal to the Watchtower Society.

I was very attracted to this young girl, a couple of years younger than me.They had a big party at the farm on the weekend, and pretty well the whole congrgation showed up. We had a ball. During the day the farmhand, Ed P., who lived there on the farm with his wife and two sons, came in from the field riding on this beautiful brown horse. He told me her name was Jeannie, and she was a very gentle horse, and I could ride her if I wanted to. He instructed me on the signals for "stop" and "go", left and right turns pulling on the reins, and how to ride in the saddle. I was dressed in my 3-piece banker's suit, with cuff-links in my shirt. I mounted up on Jeannie, and away we went. The only problem was, the stirrups were too long for my feet to reach comfortably. I could reach them only if I stood up in the saddle, when my toes could just touch the stirrups. We got out in the field, and Jeannie went from a walk to a trot. I told her "Whoah!", but she then went into a gallup, and then a full gallup. I was bouncing up and down in the saddle, and started to panic. I grabbed the reins, and pulled as hard as I could, and yelled "Whoooaaaah!" Except, I had only grabbed on to the left rein, so Jeannie thought I was signalling a left turn. I didn't know a horse could make a 90 degree turn that fast while galluping full tilt. As she swerved left, I went straight up in the air, and then straight down, and made a one-point landing on my butt. It knocked the wind out of me, and I landed so hard, the two cuff-links fell right out of my shirt. Don't ask me how! I looked down the field and saw Jeannie half a mile away, still galloping as hard as she could along the fenceline. I limped back to the farmhouse, and explained what happened. Ed P. went out and retrieve the horse. That was the last time I ever rode a horse. Still, all in all, we had a lot of fun on the farm that weekend. At the end of my vacation, I have to say it was a memorable experience, and I made a lot of new friends. I promised to write this pretty young girl I just met when I got back home. Her name was June D.

Now back home and at work, I was working as a Teller. I was having a lot of difficulty balancing my Cash at the end of each day. My bank manager had read in the paper about my JW baptism, and was very upset. I discovered his distaste for JW's when he called me into his office and asked if I had really become a JW. When I told him "Yes", he told me about a Church where the members allow themselves to be bitten by snakes, and then pray to God to get healed. "You can't tell me that is Religion!" he asserted. "And this standing on the street corners with Watchtowers and Awakes! Don't tell me that is Religion!" I could have argued this from the Bible, about how Jesus commanded his followers to preach the gospel, etc. But he was my Boss, and he was angry, so I just kept quiet. He finished his lecture, told me to think about it, and let me back to my work. Now, as I was having so much troubled balancing my daily Cash, he blamed the JW religion as the reason. He told the branch accountant that I wasn't concentrating on my work, because my head was thinking too much about religion.This wasn't true, of course. I just couldn't get things to balance. The accountant looks at your journal sheet daily, and if you're out, would try to help you find the differences. If you were short, the bank would charge you for the shortfall. They would record this on a ledgersheet in your name, and then deduct payments from your pay cheques to repay the Cash Shorts. One day, when I had another Cash Short, the Manager called the accountant into his office and told him "Let's fire him!" The accountant refused. The manager asked him "Why?" He said, "I lost nine brothers in the war fighting for our freedom of speech and religion, and it's people like you who will try to take it all away!" The accountant left his office, went to me and helped me find the difference. He told me what happened, and said "He's out to get you, you know." I continued on, trying very hard each day to balance, and did significantly improve.

Finally they took me off "Cash" and put me in the Loans and Discounts department. Suddenly the world of banking opened up to me, and I began to see the "bigger picture". Things clicked! I felt happy in my job, and knew I could succeed. A day came when they transferred one of the tellers to another city, so that our branch was short one teller. Wouldn't you know it, they put me back on "Cash". I groaned! But at the end of Day 1- "Sight balance." (meaning cash was balanced right off in 15 minutes, no recounts). Day 2- "Sight balance." Day after Day, this kept happening. It was amazing. "Very few tellers could achieve that" I was told. The bank manager later commented that every once in a while someone comes along who has trouble in one department. You take them off that department and put them in another, and they do well. Then you put them back where they were having trouble, and suddenly they "take off" with success. He said I must be one of them. He asked me if I was still a JW, and I told him I was.

One day a Western Canada Staff Department Supervisor visited the Branch. He interviewed us all one by one. In my interview, I explained some of the problems I was having at home, and that I was now older and needed to get out on my own. He smiled and said "Well, Rod, we'll see what the Bank can do for you." In two weeks my bank manager received a letter stating that I was being transferred out to the Airdrie Branch, about 20 miles north of Calgary, Alberta. I was to relieve the "Chief Clerk" (Branch Accountant) for one month, while he was away on holidays, and after that, I was to be transferred in to a downtown branch in Calgary. I was jubilant. Now it could never be said that I moved out of our home because of the JW Religion; the Bank had transferred me out, so I had to leave.

Obviously, I needed a car. My uncle had an old 1949 Ford parked out in his field. He sold it to me for $150.00. I was ready to face the world! I remember driving down that Trans-Canada Highway to my new home in Airdrie. It was very exciting, and I couldn't wait. Whenever a staff member gets transferred, the bank manager writes a letter to the manager of the branch where you are going to, with a copy to the District Staff Department. The branch accountant told me he read the letter, and commented that he had never seen a better letter of recommendation on file in all his years of banking. I guess he must have gotten over his hatred toward me as a J.W.

A few months earlier, I started writing letters to June D from the farm. She had graduated from Grade 12, and now wanted to go to post-seconday school to get training to become a Secretary. She decided to move to Medicine Hat and go to business college there. I helped her find a place to live. Would you believe it was the home of Grandma Fisher from the old farm, and who I studied with in High School. We began to see each other regularly, and we attended meetings together, and went out in field service together. We fell deeply in love, and we were planning to get married. But now I was being transferred out by the bank. This left June feeling pretty alone and kind of isolated, because I was her close companion.

When in Airdrie, and later Calgary, I would travel 180 miles from Calgary to Medicine Hat every weekend. I would stay with mom and dad, but spent most of the time with June. Soon the day came when June had completed her courses in Secretarial School, and now was ready to get a job. That summer we went to the International Convention in Pasedena, California. I had arranged a two-week holiday with the Bank. We all went to Pasedena with the D Family. I remember how we were all crammed into their stationwagon. It was a great trip, and we enjoyed the Assembly, but it was very hot there. By the end of the week we were all sick of Mexican food, and couldn't wait to get home for some roast beef and mashed potatoes smothered in brown gravy. After that, June moved to Calgary, and in due time got a Secretarial job, and took board and room at the home of the Congregation Overseer and his family. I was staying at the home of an elderly sister as well, with room and board. So now we were both living in Calgary, and looking forward to the big day when we would get married.

We settled into a routine, attending meetings, giving talks and going out in field service. I bought her a ring, and we celebrated our engagement. We planned a wedding for May 1964, which was less than a year away. One Saturday morning June and I went out in field service, making short presentations and offering magazines. There was only half an hour available, so in order to cover the entire block, June went one way and I went the other, and we were to meet each other on the other side of the block. June ended up on this one doorstep where she had a very interesting discussion with a guy who happened to be Mormon. His name was John C., and he was married with three kids, and also had a brother who was JW in Edmonton, Alberta. He therefore, was very familiar with JW teachings.

Because "Magazine Day" called for short presentations, June suggested we set up a meeting for another day, and she would introduce John C to me. The following week we did the visit, and we found the family very friendly. John and I hit it off immediately. At this meeting we set up the "ground rules" for later discussions. We decided to have a series of weekly discussions, and for each meeting we would focus on a single topic or doctrine. We also agreed to use the King James version of the Bible. We further agreed that we would listen to one another's presentations without interruption, after which we could ask questions and debate the subject. Looking at the list of topics, we tried to find a doctrine where Mormons and JW's differed the most. The most obvious was the "Soul Doctrine", because the JW's taught that when we die, we do not have a spirit or soul that leaves the body and lives on after death, whereas Mormons believed that we do. After the meeting, we went home, and I prepared for the next meeting. I was absolutely convinced we could prove from the Bible that we do not have an immortal soul, and that when we die, we do not live on as a spirit. At the next meeting, I proceeded to quote Ezekiel 18:4 "...the Soul that sinneth, it shall die". Then Genesis 2:7 "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul."So God created man from the "dust of the earth" - the elements, and breathed into man the "breath of life"- the life force, and it was this that made man a "living soul". You "are a Soul" NOT you "have a Soul". We got into Hebrew and Greek words for soul and spirit and talked about ruah, pneuma, psuche, nephesh, etc. We looked at scriptures that showed no man has an immortal soul. I Corinthians 15: 53, 54 talks of mortal man putting on immortality. I Timothy 6:16 says "who only hath immortality" referring to the Lord God. Ecclesiastes 3:19, 20 ".....a man hath no preeminence above a beast....All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again". The Bible uses the word "Soul"over 8,000 times, and speaks of it as dieing, being killed or captured, being weak or hungry, and all kinds of other attributes that show man is a soul, and it is not immortal. How then, can the Mormon Church be true? This was the thrust of the argument.

John C. agreed that in all these places, the use of the word "Soul" is in the context of man being a soul, but that none of these passages can be regarded as relevant to the doctrine of the soul, as they in now way speak about the nature of man. It is true that man is mortal, meaning he dies, and he seeks immortality, which means afterwards he would no longer be subject to death. But this does not address the question of the Nature of Man.

In terms of what happens when we die, when God created Adam, Genesis talks about him being made of the dust of the earth, and God bretehd nto his nostrils the breath of life, and so man became a living soul. This is talking about the Creation of man's body, and the breath of life that makes the living soul alive. But this does not necessarily prove that a spirit could not or does not inhabit the body. (Mormons believe in the preexistence of the spirti, that we were spirit children in Heaven before we came to earth to experience mortality and to obtain a physical body.) John asked me to consider Jeremiah 1: 1, 4-5: "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, and before thou camest forth out of the womb I santified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." John asked "How can someone be foreordained if he did not yet exist? Some argue that this is about the foreknowledge of God, but that is a weak argument."

Then there is Ecclesiastes 12:

"Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

"If the spirit returns to God at death, surely the Bible is teaching that man has more than just the "breath of life" or "life force"

As we finished that meeting, it began to dawn on me that the Bible does not make its teachings clear and concise in every instance, but can be subjected to different interpretations. Even though we were in two different religious camps, believing the same book "the Bible", yet it was obvious we are believing diametrically opposite beliefs on the same doctrine using the same book to "prove" our respective interpretations. What is wrong with this picture?

A number of other meetings were subsequently held. We discussed the Trinity Doctrine on one occasion, and while there were differences, Mormons and JW's both disagree with the concept of "Three Gods in One God". However, JW's teach that the Holy Spirit is Jehovah's "activating force" whereas Mormons say the Holy Spirit is a separate and distinct personage, but does not have a body, while God the Father and Jesus Christ both have a body. They are "One" in terms of "Purpose" rather than in "Nature". This was a discussion that could go on for hours, maybe even days. We would never be able to fully resolve the differences one way or another, and it is a subject that can get extremely complicated. Christendom calls the "Trinity" a "Mystery" that we mere mortals simply cannot comprehend.

In another meeting we talked about the Hell doctrine, and we agreed that the Bible speaks symbolically about Hell, and that there is no such thing as a fiery, burning hell where we are literally burned and tortured forever in such a place.

John did tell us about the Joseph Smith story and the Book of Mormon, but we just weren't ready to accept this as true. We did take turns going to one another's meetings. One week John came to the Kingdom Hall and listened to a Watchtower study. The next week June and I went with John to a Mormon Church called a Ward, and we experienced a Sacrament Meeting and a Sunday School session, and I also went to one of their Elders' Quorum meetings. June was not very keen on going to a Mormon Church, but reluctantly went along anyway.

Time was marching on, and the meetings reached a kind of hiatus. We were getting closer to the time for the wedding, and John and his family were moving back to Penticton in B.C., so we would not be seeing each other in the forseeable future. I was not too thrilled with the $275.00 a month I was earning at the bank, so looked for a job elsewhere and found one as an assistant accountant with the Canadian Bronze Company. The company sold brass and bronze merchandise, and repaired and electroplated car bumpers that had been damaged in car accidents. They started me off at $300.00 a month. I now felt we were better prepared to live as a married couple and be able to cover our living costs. June was not going to be working at a job, so this would be our sole family income.

Now it was time to concentrate on plans for the wedding. We decided to have a "garden wedding" on the farm of June's family. I checked with the Weather Bureau for some historical data as to what the weather had been like over the years on the weekend of May 16, and statistically it looked quite promising. However, if the weather did turn out to be bad, we needed to be ready with alternate plans for an "indoor wedding". My dad said we had to be the world's "biggest optimists" planning for an outdoor wedding in May. It was not unusual around the Province of Alberta for there to be rain or snow at that time of year. Anyway, on the day of the wedding, the weather turned out to be bright and sunny, warm and very still. Some flowers were in bloom, and spring was definitely in the air. It could not have been better. The wedding was a beautiful success. The reception and dance was held in a rented hall in Brooks. At about 10:30 that night, we changed into clothes that were more comfortable, said our last goodbyes on the dance floor, and drove off into the night, back to Calgary and into our new apartment we had just rented. Half-way home, we ran into a very big snowstorm, and thought we weren't going to make it. Talk about how close this came to ruining the outdoor wedding. We considered ourselves very fortunate indeed!

After our one-week honeymoon, we settled down into married life. Everything was beautiful, and we were very happy. Or so we thought..........

................................................................to be continued.