Posts by Jeffro

20

Why are people beholden to ancient superstitions?

by Doug Mason in

how is it that in a world that is so technological, scientific, fact-based, evidence-based, and so on, that many people are superstitious - even more so, the superstitions of ancient cultures?.

doug.

Jeffro

Cold Steel:

We Mormons were criticized back in the 1830s for believing in angels in a day of locomotives (as if locomotives defined the pinnacle of man’s ingenuity).

And rightly so. It's drivel.

90

Why do so many think JW Religion is a Cult? (NO APOSTATES PLEASE)

by Brother Mike in

jw
friends

my question is, why do so many think the watchtower bible tract society is a cult?

.

Jeffro

Blueeyes54:

An apostate hates Jehovah God and His son Jesus, and all that they represent.

Not only is that not the correct definition of apostate (see my previous post), but it's also plainly illogical. There would be very few people (and even fewer former JWs) who believe in (the Abrahamic) God & Jesus and hate 'all that they represent'. Most people who leave the JW religion either still believe in God and worship him in some way, or do not believe he exists at all, making 'hatred' redundant.

90

Why do so many think JW Religion is a Cult? (NO APOSTATES PLEASE)

by Brother Mike in

jw
friends

my question is, why do so many think the watchtower bible tract society is a cult?

.

Jeffro

Brother Mike:

An apostate is one who leaves the JW religion and purposely tries to go out of there way to stop others from learning the truth.

Wrong. An apostate is any person who leaves any group due to a disagreement with that group's teachings, ideals, etc. As such, any person who leaves any religion (or other belief system) to become a JW is an apostate.

JWs use the term apostate in a special way as a propaganda technique. (Using special terms for outsiders or defectors is itself one of the hallmarks of a cult.)

*** g00 6/22 p. 6 The Manipulation of Information ***
Name-Calling
Some people [Jehovah's Witnesses] insult those who disagree with them by questioning character or motives instead of focusing on the facts. Name-calling slaps a negative, easy-to-remember label [such as "apostate"] onto a person, a group, or an idea. The name-caller hopes that the label will stick. If people reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative label instead of weighing the evidence for themselves, the name-caller’s strategy has worked.

Your use of "the truth" is also an improper semantical reference to what you really mean: 'whatever happens to be taught by JWs at any particular time'. Obviously a person who doesn't believe JW teachings to be true cannot at the same time want to "stop others from learning the truth".

79

The life differences between a good christian and good athiest

by EndofMysteries in

let's compare a christian who goes to a non judgemental / non guilt trip church which focuses really on the gospels, jesus teachings on being non judgemental, anything out of love there is no law against, and they contribute to society.

then an athiest who if you put side by side w/ the above christian, you would not know any difference unless you asked their beliefs.

both are good people, who are able to lead lives doing what they want, enjoying their life, and trying to help their neighbors too.

Jeffro

EndofMysteries:

And if they happened to not have done all they wanted, they atleast have a hope.

The premise (Pascal's Wager) is stupid. It relies on the presumptions that there are only two options - Christian or non-Christian (often simplified to atheist), and that if there is an afterlife, it must be the one offered by the Christian religion.

What if Zeus is really the 'true' God? Better to be worshipping no one rather than following the competition.

What if there's a creator that hates the concept of 'worship' and just wants its creations to get along? Not good news for Christians.

What if everyone gets a happy afterlife regardless of religious beliefs? Everybody wins.

And what if there really is the 'Christian' deity, who wants 'mercy and not sacrifice'? Since there is no evidence for believing in a god or gods, any deity that would kill people for being rational is, frankly, a bit of a prick, and not at all consistent with a god that would either want or show mercy.

However, the most likely scenario, based on all the available evidence is that you're alive while you're alive, and then you're not.

23

As far as the Watchtower goes, how should an adulteress be punished?

by I_love_Jeff in

should we use jesus' advice john 8:7 or god's advice .

leviticus 20:10?

.

Jeffro

I_love_Jeff:

Should we use Jesus' advice John 8:7 or God's advice Leviticus 20:10?

If it's a choice between only those two options, go with the fable attributed to Jesus.

Better still, how about people mind their own business.

The 'adulteress' and her husband can decide whether they want to remain in the relationship and get past the affair, or whether they would be better off divorcing. It's pathetic that in this day and age, individuals can be convinced by religious groups that their private actions need to be overseen by the local shaman.

23

As far as the Watchtower goes, how should an adulteress be punished?

by I_love_Jeff in

should we use jesus' advice john 8:7 or god's advice .

leviticus 20:10?

.

Jeffro

KateWild:

IMO, the bible was written by men to control women, and the vulnerable.

The Bible was written by people who lived in a society that already took advantage of women and the vulnerable.

The Bible's attitudes towards women are a symptom of that culture, not the cause.

20

Why are people beholden to ancient superstitions?

by Doug Mason in

how is it that in a world that is so technological, scientific, fact-based, evidence-based, and so on, that many people are superstitious - even more so, the superstitions of ancient cultures?.

doug.

Jeffro

Doug Mason:

How is it that in a world that is so technological, scientific, fact-based, evidence-based, and so on, that many people are superstitious - even more so, the superstitions of ancient cultures?

As a social animal, people derive a sense of community by maintaining traditions. There is also some excitement in believing certain superstitions, while others give people a feeling of control over otherwise unpredictable events. Additionally, technological advancement doesn't automatically make everyone more advanced or rational.

Watkins:

Like throwing spilt salt over your shoulder, or not walking under a ladder, or not opening an umbrella inside the house, or believing you'll have 7 yrs. bad luck if you break a mirror, or knocking on wood?

You forgot prayer.

It is fairly disappointing that in this day and age, there are still people who believe they can influence events by talking to an invisible friend in space.

17

WHAT THE D.O SAID THE BIBLE SAYS... ABOUT SALVATION.

by DATA-DOG in

one more highlight from the ca...for now... how to survive the end.

the bible says:.

1) prayer.

Jeffro

Perry:

It's about the same (more or less) as any works based religion ... which is all of them except for Christianity.

All religions that 'offer' some kind of salvation where there is a requirement for any action (e.g. expressing 'faith' in the 'ransom' or being a member of that religion) are works-based.

The concept of 'faith' vs. 'works' is a false dilemma because the concepts are not really separate things. The notion of having faith independent of any action is just rhetorical wordplay.

224

Another problem for JW apologists

by Jeffro in

the 2013 edition of the new world translation renders 2 kings 17:1 as:.

in the 12th year of king ahaz of judah, hoshea the son of elah became king over israel in samaria; he ruled for nine years.. this is in fact a better rendering than the previous nwt, which stated:.

in the twelfth year of ahaz the king of judah, hoshea the son of elah became king in samaria over israel for nine years.. despite their improved rendering, the watch tower society still claims that hoshea's reign 'really' began in 758 bce, but that it was 'established' in the 12th year of ahaz.

Jeffro

scholar:

Your attempt to refute the methodology in calculating the reigns of the Divided Monarchy according to the principle of the Nisan-based calendation is simply bogus and misleading. Such tabulations of the data misrepresents what the Aid book outlines before the presentation of the Chart for the Divided Monarchy. I suggest you' read the preceding paragraphs most carefully in order not to continue in making a complete fool of yourself. That chart was the basis for my claim we calculate the reigns of the Judean on the Nisan to Nisan basis applying the same methodology to that of the reigns of the Kings of Israel'.

Incorrect use of methodology.

What is "bogus and misleading" is the manner in which accession years (using statements such as "counting his reign officially from the following Nisan") are inconsistently treated in Aid (and Insight) when their chronology doesn't fit. The Watch Tower Society's intermittent need to 'shift' reigns by a year in this manner is further evidence that Judah was actually using Tishri-based dating. You have previously claimed that the Watch Tower Society's 'methodology' is simple, however their approach is inconsistent and seems arbitrary (that is, it would only really be arbitrary if it had been an honest but unskilled attempt, however their underlying motive of trying to force certain events into specific years is actually deceptive.)

Further, the reader is advised in the introductory paragraphs before the chart that it is not intended to be viewed as an 'absolute chronology, but rather as a suggested presentation of the reigns of the two kingdoms'.

As previously stated, it's little wonder that they provide such a disclaimer about accuracy of their chart, because upon closer examination, their chronology is actually impossible and the use of more absolute years would make it too obvious that their chronology is fraudulent.

What I suggest is that you use the lsted tabulations of the texts in 2 Kings and see how these are discussed in the scholarly literature as to how these texts can be harmonized with proposed calendations and see if there is some consistency. In short, you prove whether there is any consistency of the texts and what calendation was used for both Kingdoms. the I will check your conclusions with the scholarly literature.

I hardly need my work to be 'checked' by you. I'll happily take suggestions from some of the fine forum members such as AnnOMaly or Leolaia though. Indeed, it was AnnOMaly's excellent advice that led me to perform the decision-tables analysis.

It's amusing that you pay lip service here to 'scholarly literature' here, even though you actually ignore all of the scholarly literature in favour of the delusional chronology offered by the Watch Tower Society.

224

Another problem for JW apologists

by Jeffro in

the 2013 edition of the new world translation renders 2 kings 17:1 as:.

in the 12th year of king ahaz of judah, hoshea the son of elah became king over israel in samaria; he ruled for nine years.. this is in fact a better rendering than the previous nwt, which stated:.

in the twelfth year of ahaz the king of judah, hoshea the son of elah became king in samaria over israel for nine years.. despite their improved rendering, the watch tower society still claims that hoshea's reign 'really' began in 758 bce, but that it was 'established' in the 12th year of ahaz.

Jeffro

scholar:

The scholarly literature certainly supports the concept of interregnum and its applicability during the reign of Hoshea and the WT literature certainly uses that term in reference to Hoshea's reign. You need to research more.

I was too busy laughing at your comment about dogmatism that I didn't fully address your claim here.

Please provide a source for your claim that Watch Tower Society literature uses the term "interregnum" in reference to the alleged period of 'unrecognised reign'.