Posts by Hellrider

47

Luke 16: 19-24

by vlad in

19but a certain man was rich, and he used to deck himself with purple and linen, enjoying himself from day to day with magnificence.20but a certain beggar named laz arus used to be put at his gate, full of ulcers21and desiring to be filled with the things dropping from the table of the rich man.

yes, too, the dogs would come and lick his ulcers.22now in course of time the beggar died and he was carried off by the angels to the bosom [position] of abraham.. also, the rich man died and was buried.23and in ha des he lifted up his eyes, he existing in torments, and he saw abraham afar off and laz arus in the bosom [position] with him.24so he called and said, father abraham, have mercy on me and send laz arus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because i am in anguish in this blazing fire.. my old account does not seem to be working, so i am not a new member but i did not post loads anyway.

i am an now an athiest myself but anytime i ask jws about a scripture they say its pointless discussing it with me becuase i am only doing it to tear them down.

Hellrider

Mondo1:

Hellrider,
Please show me where Jesus confronts the idea of the soul's preexistence please.

The idea of the souls pre-existence isn`t necessarily present in the NT. The passage you are referring to refers to the old jewish idea/belief that some day, the departed prophets would return. This idea is in itself based on the jewish belief that the "souls" (in some sense) of the departed rightous go to heaven, while the souls of the wicked go to Sheol. If Jesus confirms this womans belief in this old doctrine, there is nothing neither shocking nor surprising about that, as he himself was part of this jewish tradition. But the idea of an ancient prophet (in this case Elijah) coming back to earth in the form of John the baptist, has nothing to do with the souls pre-existence, it is more in the sense of rebirth (a soul that lived before, was swept away to heaven to return at a later date, in a new body - in this case taking on the function of a messenger preparing the way for Jesus). Jesus never confronts this idea, and there is nothing unchristian about accepting that this might happen.

I personally believe he was taken elsewhere on earth, but it doesn't matter to much, because if he was taken to heaven and lived forever, he was still not resurrected because he simply never died, so my point remains. It is amazing though that you deny Jesus' express words that nobody has ascended to heaven (John 3:13) and Paul's express statement that Jesus was the first raised (Col. 1:18; 1Cor. 15:20).

Pauls statement must be understood within it`s context. As we allready know that others were raised before him, for example by Jesus, we know that Paul obviously means "raised incorruptible and immortal", right? And so, within this context, to create an over-all acceptable doctrine on this issue, we must assume that the others that were raised before, were raised to some other state. This is obvious. Lazarus was raised, but would eventually grow old and die. In other words, there are different kinds of ressurection, and you have to acknowledge this, or you will have to ignore the other instances of ressurection in the Bible, among them, the ressurections Christ performed. As for John 3: Well, the fact remains that 2 Kings 2 says: and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven."

How do you solve this, then? Do you, in true Jehovahs Witness-manner just close your eyes when you are confronted with this verse in 2 Kings (to maintain your allready established doctrine of no-soul), or do you try to harmonize them? I personally choose the latter. I would say...clearly, heaven is a big place. Perhaps what Jesus is referring to in John is...the "inner abode", or something like that... Anyway, you can`t ignore 2 Kings. If you wish to "save" the Bible, and claim that there are no disreprancies (which I would assume you want, as you believe in it), then you have to harmonize the scriptures! Not choose one and ignore the ones that do not "fit"! That is not acceptable!

47

Luke 16: 19-24

by vlad in

19but a certain man was rich, and he used to deck himself with purple and linen, enjoying himself from day to day with magnificence.20but a certain beggar named laz arus used to be put at his gate, full of ulcers21and desiring to be filled with the things dropping from the table of the rich man.

yes, too, the dogs would come and lick his ulcers.22now in course of time the beggar died and he was carried off by the angels to the bosom [position] of abraham.. also, the rich man died and was buried.23and in ha des he lifted up his eyes, he existing in torments, and he saw abraham afar off and laz arus in the bosom [position] with him.24so he called and said, father abraham, have mercy on me and send laz arus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because i am in anguish in this blazing fire.. my old account does not seem to be working, so i am not a new member but i did not post loads anyway.

i am an now an athiest myself but anytime i ask jws about a scripture they say its pointless discussing it with me becuase i am only doing it to tear them down.

Hellrider

You, and others, continue to miss the point that Jesus didn't pull this story out of thin air, but there was a preexisting tradition from which he drew.

Mondo1 conveniently ignores that in all other instances where Jesus is confronted with doctrines he does not support (such as when confronted by the Saducees on the issue of the ressurection), he speaks out against it! So, given the fact that Jesus corrects people when he hears of incorrect beliefs strongly suggests that in the least, he would never use an incorrect doctrine to "prove a point", even in a parable.

And still, Mondo is not adressing the points made, he just "talks around it", looking for loopholes, in true Jehovahs Witness-tradition.

47

Luke 16: 19-24

by vlad in

19but a certain man was rich, and he used to deck himself with purple and linen, enjoying himself from day to day with magnificence.20but a certain beggar named laz arus used to be put at his gate, full of ulcers21and desiring to be filled with the things dropping from the table of the rich man.

yes, too, the dogs would come and lick his ulcers.22now in course of time the beggar died and he was carried off by the angels to the bosom [position] of abraham.. also, the rich man died and was buried.23and in ha des he lifted up his eyes, he existing in torments, and he saw abraham afar off and laz arus in the bosom [position] with him.24so he called and said, father abraham, have mercy on me and send laz arus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because i am in anguish in this blazing fire.. my old account does not seem to be working, so i am not a new member but i did not post loads anyway.

i am an now an athiest myself but anytime i ask jws about a scripture they say its pointless discussing it with me becuase i am only doing it to tear them down.

Hellrider

Don`t expect Mondo1 to answer these questions. He has always refused to take a stand on questions he could not possibly answer, because his religion can`t answer them.

Ok Mondo1, let me be more specific: What happened to Elijah after he had been swept away to heaven? The Bible doesn`t say, but let us speculate. Did he "live out his years" and then die, up there in heaven? Did God just take him up there so he could grow old and die, up there?

47

Luke 16: 19-24

by vlad in

19but a certain man was rich, and he used to deck himself with purple and linen, enjoying himself from day to day with magnificence.20but a certain beggar named laz arus used to be put at his gate, full of ulcers21and desiring to be filled with the things dropping from the table of the rich man.

yes, too, the dogs would come and lick his ulcers.22now in course of time the beggar died and he was carried off by the angels to the bosom [position] of abraham.. also, the rich man died and was buried.23and in ha des he lifted up his eyes, he existing in torments, and he saw abraham afar off and laz arus in the bosom [position] with him.24so he called and said, father abraham, have mercy on me and send laz arus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because i am in anguish in this blazing fire.. my old account does not seem to be working, so i am not a new member but i did not post loads anyway.

i am an now an athiest myself but anytime i ask jws about a scripture they say its pointless discussing it with me becuase i am only doing it to tear them down.

Hellrider

Mondo1:

One cannot ignore that this text is not speaking of departed souls, but only whole people, able to drink, able to feel physical pain, etc. The parable, if you watch the context, is speaking of "the rich" and those "who God helps." Who, in context, are these? According to the context, what changed that would correlate to their deaths? And, if you continue reading, what is ever so tiny that one could relate to only a drop of water? If you can answer these questions, reading Luke 15-17, you'll understand the parable perfectly and you'll see how it has nothing to do with teaching of a reality and is merely language that his audience knew so to make it easy for him to relate the lesson.

You are confusing the modern christian distinction sould vs. body with the contemporary distinction in judaism at the time. At the time, the distinction Jesus referred to was the pharisaic distinction between "life before death" and "life after death", which is not to be confused with the later christian distinction "dead body" vs. "living soul" (the greek distinction). But that there certainly was a distinction is evident from several books in the OT, which are filled with these references to a "dark" existence (!!!) in Sheol after death. In short, the jews had not yet been able to decide on whether the afterlife took form of a "raised body" (such as in 2 Maccabees) or whether there really was a real separation of soul and body (Book of Wisdom 9.15). The idea of bodily ressurection (and no, I`m not talking about the one after Armageddon) before Jesus` own ressurection is evident also in the legends concerning what happened to certain prophets of the Old Testament:

"2 Kings 2:1,11
And it came to pass, when the LORD would take up Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind, that Elijah went with Elisha from Gilgal.
And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven."

This is the context in which Jesus speaks the words recorded in Luke 16. If you read the Gospels carefully, you will see that not on one single occasion does he disagree with the Pharisees on fundamental, doctrinal issues. Nowhere! He is criticising them for their behaviour and hypocricy, yes, but not for their doctrines (unlike the Saducees). This is the religious tradition Jesus was born into, this was judaism at the time he was born. There is absolutely no reason to assume that he was using a doctrine he did not believe in, in that parable.
You will of course argue that Jesus was the first one raised from the dead, but that`s ok. We can argue over that too.

47

Luke 16: 19-24

by vlad in

19but a certain man was rich, and he used to deck himself with purple and linen, enjoying himself from day to day with magnificence.20but a certain beggar named laz arus used to be put at his gate, full of ulcers21and desiring to be filled with the things dropping from the table of the rich man.

yes, too, the dogs would come and lick his ulcers.22now in course of time the beggar died and he was carried off by the angels to the bosom [position] of abraham.. also, the rich man died and was buried.23and in ha des he lifted up his eyes, he existing in torments, and he saw abraham afar off and laz arus in the bosom [position] with him.24so he called and said, father abraham, have mercy on me and send laz arus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because i am in anguish in this blazing fire.. my old account does not seem to be working, so i am not a new member but i did not post loads anyway.

i am an now an athiest myself but anytime i ask jws about a scripture they say its pointless discussing it with me becuase i am only doing it to tear them down.

Hellrider

Ahh, Mondo1 is back:

There is much to be said about this verse. The context that leads up to the text is all of parables, starting in chapter 15 and working through 16, which is all a single context, giving indication that it is a parable. The language is drawn from a known tradition of the Pharisees and so he is using it to illustrate a point, much of which is explained by both the preface provided by Luke and the words of Jesus immediately prior to the parable.

Yes, it`s a parable. Everyone can see that. But can you find even one other example of Jesus using heathen, ungodly doctrines in his parables?

It is not dealing with departed souls, but with physical bodies with parts such as tongues, fingers, etc, that can consume water. The name Lazarus is significant in the parable because it means "He who God helps." It is not speaking of the final judgment in Gehenna, the lake of fire, but "hades" which is one of the things to be thrown into the lake.

And yet, the rich man is conscious down there in Hades, as Lazarus is conscious in the "bosom of Abraham".

So is it teaching hell?

Yes. And how to avoid it.

No. It is a parable. Is it drawing from language that was used by those who believed in hell? Yes, but only because they knew the existing tradition and it fit the message that he was intending. Mondo

So you are saying that the son of God, Jesus Christ, would use a heathen, dispicable doctrine borrowed from heathen religions to prove a point? I would like to see you do that at your next talk at the KH. You would be dragged by the ears to the back room before you could say "Jehovah God".

Can you find one more place in the NT where Jesus is using an ungodly doctrine in a parable, one he doesn`t believe in, to "prove a point"? I sure can`t.

And we forgot to mention that Jesus speaks quite often about the punishment awaiting the wicked. "The fiery furnace", and so on.

Further: If the parable is meant to warn agains a certain kind of behaviour (selfishness, rejecting God, etc.), which it clearly is, then, if Jesus truly believed that man has no soul, that the wicked are just going to be destroyed, and never be conscious again, wouldn`t you then say that the parable he is presenting is extremely misleading!??

The jw-"symbolic" interpretation of the rich man and Lazarus is one of the stupidest doctrines within their entire religion (except for the 144000 janitors and window washers in heaven, of course).

133

Mental Illness - diagnosed for me

by Crumpet in

i've long known, and most of you probably have as well, that there was something not all there with me.

mostly i put it down to me being bad.

questions i've never been asked before.

Hellrider

Crumpet:

Hellrider - so when did you start noticing any kind of oddness or disparities that led you to seek help. And how come it took 10 years.

I was first diagnosed with anxiety and depression at the age of 24, after a kind of nervous breakdown. Like most with bi-polar, I focused on the thing that was troublesome; the depression. Unless you have really manic periods (go nuts with your credit card, drink like a sponge, sleep with everyone etc), you won`t consider yourself "manic", and consequently, you will never tell your doctor about these periods where you are a little bit...nuts (in my case, really...restless - and kind of a "system overload" in my thought patterns). So you`ll only focus on your depression and anxiety, and this is what you`ll be talking to your doctor about, and consequently, some "things" go unnoticed. This is how it was in my case. The bi-polar thing wasn`t discovered until I was sent to an expert on sleep disorders (yes, I have problems with that too...), and we went in-depth into my history. At least I finally understood more about my mood swings, for example, why I stay angry for days on end if I get really upset/hurt over something, what happens when I get stressed, etc. I`m not on medication for it though, I tried, but I didn`t like the side effects. I do take anti-depressives though (cipralex). What really tipped this last doctor of, was when we started talking about my interests (how I like writing and litterature), how my grandfather (the artist - wood carving and painting) had terrible mood swings causing havoc for everyone around him, his alcoholism, other alcoholics in my family, etc. The pieces of the puzzle started coming together. It`s a long process for a lot of people, finding out that they have bi-polar.

133

Mental Illness - diagnosed for me

by Crumpet in

i've long known, and most of you probably have as well, that there was something not all there with me.

mostly i put it down to me being bad.

questions i've never been asked before.

Hellrider

Crumpet: That`s my diagnose too, bi-polar disorder (the "light" version, bi-polar 2). It just took the doctors 10 years to figure that out...

14

UN + Watchtower as an NGO + conspiracy theory?

by cyberguy in

has anyone reviewed this material?

i think the writer is mistaken on a number of issues!.

http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/.

Hellrider

The way those articles are written, with the author constantly looking for loopholes to excuse the WatchTowers adulterous affair with the UN, suggests (to me, at least), that the author is a lawyer, or law-student. And as lawyers usually are full of Sh!t, and the WTS has proven to be full of SH!T ever since the beginning, rest assure that those articles are the most SH!T-filled piles of dung you could ever come across. It`s double-Sh!t, in a sense.

25

I had a super-natural experience

by Blackboo in

i know some might not believe but i had this experience about 5 years ago.

i was laying in the bed..and wide-awake..all of a sudden i literally saw a white-hand...that seem like a spirit..and it lifted me up in the air....and i actually felt my body coming back down to the bed..i was not dreaming at all..because i was aware of the things around the room..i wasnt scared but in awe of what happen.

the hand was so real looking and i was staring at it..there was no face..it happen so fast..but i remember everything from the evil laugh afterwards too..that one blew me away.

Hellrider

Your right i believe my body was still sleep but i was mentally awake

Sleep paralyzis. I have experienced that too. In my case, it was as if I stepped out of my own body (involuntarily), like my soul (or whatever) was sucked out of the body, which was still laying on the matress. It was totally bizarre and really scary, cause I didn`t want it to happen, but I couldn`t stop it. Then I was thrown (hard) back into my body, laying on the matress. When I mention this to superstitious people, they say that I had an out-of-the-body-experience. Me, I think it was sleep paralyzis. No need to ascribe something that can be explained medically, to "metaphysics".

25

More Evidence that "666" refers to United Nations

by smontgom in

a new book claims that the number 666 refers to the united nations through the name "haaretz haqaturim", which means "the nations of the united ones.

" commonly known as the number of the beast, the number 666 is from the thirteenth chapter of the book of revelation in the christian bible where verse 18 reads: .

"here is wisdom.

Hellrider

It`s not the UN. The number is 666 and it is jewish numerology for Neron Cæsar (Cæsar Nero). The number 616 referred to by IP-SEC is an interesting exception to the rule: A few early manuscripts did have 616 (which would make the name "fit" the number without the N at the end of Neron), but the majority had 666. Read all about it here:

http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/666.htm

((the author allows for other possible calculations too, some more plausible than others (I think Romith - the roman kingdom and Romiti - the roman man, also sounds plausible - but there is general acceptance that it refers to Nero).