Posts by yaddayadda

9

The name "Jehovah's Witnesses" adopted 75 years ago July 26, 1931

by cabasilas in

if memory serves, isn't this the 75th anniversary of the adoption of the name "jehovah's witnesses"?

has the society made much of this?

seems like it would have been a great pr opportunity..

yaddayadda

Hey maybe they could move the start of the last days to 1931! Great idea, thanks - I'll pass it on to Ted.

5

UN prophecies

by Fleshybirdfodder in

with all the fanfare of the "divine deliverance at hand" convention, are the dubs still pushing the idea of the un banning all religion globally?

we've seen how powerless the un was with iraq and now with the situation in lebanon.

do they really still believe that the un will actually do this, or even have the power to suggest it for that matter?

You are absolutely right. The Watchtowers prognostication that the UN will turn on all religion soon is absurd and completely untenable. It was Fred Franz's baby I believe and is now an embarrassment. Probably a few on the gb would like to ditch the interpretation but they have hopelessly painted themselves into a corner haha! Old Father time will humble them all, as he does everyone eventually.

17

A new "class" for the goobering body.

by IP_SEC in

the wts is fond of associating itself with great men of the bible claiming to be of this or that class (john class, isaiah class and so on).

they claim god given authority to keep his people clean and to make rules to cover situations not found in the bible.. pharisee rule not found in the law.. *** w96 9/1 12 the law before christ ***.

pharisee rule not found in the law.. *** w96 9/1 12 the law before christ ***.

yaddayadda

'Goobering Body' ROFLMAO LOL HEHEhehe... great post by the way.

125

FRESH OFF THE PRESS.... 9/1/06 WT "When a Loved One Leaves Jeh."

by schne_belly in

.

this just in for your reading displeasure......enjoy

.

yaddayadda

What a rotten, sick article. It reeks of cultish mind manipulation. Shame on them for suggesting that leaving the organisation, which then shuns you, is like leaving Jehovah. Shame on the GB and its lackeys to put themselves on a par with Moses' authority; to tell others to get back to the organisation ("back to Jehovah") because their lives are at stake and Armageddon is around the on the horizon, etc; to suggest that grieving because of feeling that their child is 'dead' - all due to the Society's wicked shunning policy - should be combatted by reading over and over the Society's flawed reasons for why shunning is a loving discipline - in other words, brainwash, brainwash, brainwash your natural feelings away until you are dead and cold inside. If you ask me, JW's who are suffering because of missing their shunned loved one due to following the Society's cult shunning policy deserve all the suffering they get!

21

From one cult to another

by JH in

jw
friends

i was the only jw in my family.

by that i mean my parents never were jw nor was my sister, and i'm single.. when i started fading back in the early 90's as a jw, my sister and her husband decided to start attending meetings with the evangelists, then the pentecostal religion, and then the baptists.

they're baptized in that religion.

yaddayadda

Good on your Mom. What are you worried about?

24

"So Alone"

by scout575 in

"my dad died when i was 13, and my closest cousin got raped and stabbed and burned when i was 15. i am an only child so she was the closest thing i had to a sister.

i felt so alone too.

no one in the churches i attended seemed to care.

yaddayadda

What is the point of this thread? Anyone can pluck an example such as you posted and try and prove that 'church is a bad place'. Arguably there are more lonely, isolated people outside of churches than in them. If you don't want to attend a new church then join some club, or do some voluntary work, whatever - Just realise you will find outside of church just as many people that will abandon you in times of personal trouble than in church.

52

What happened between Jesus death & the gospels being written?

by yaddayadda in

hi, i'm interested in researching this subject.

can anyone recommend any good books that offer critical theories on the origins of early christianity, specifically the content and creation of the gospels.

for instance, how much of the gospels is underlying historical truth and how much might be exaggerations that crept in through, say 'chinese whispers' in the time between jesus death and the writing of the gospels ?

yaddayadda

Ok, I see what you are saying Narkissos. Your comments seem reasonable enough. I've seen that 'the incredible shrinking jesus' book advertised and might buy that too. Actually, recently I found a website www.christianorigins.com and was reading an article by a Christopher Price that echoes your comments, ie, that nearly all scholars admit that the miracle accounts can be traced back to the earliest stages and that Jesus was viewed as a miracle worker. (The next step in the process, like you say, is to test the extent that the miracle accounts may be traced back to pre-Christian origins). Here are some quotes from the article:

V. The Assessment of Critical Scholarship

For all of the above reasons, modern scholarship has concluded that Jesus' reputation as a miracle worker originated with Jesus himself. His contemporary followers believed that Jesus was performing miracles in their midst. See B.L. Blackburn, "Miracles and Miracle Stories" (in Jesus and the Gospels, p. 556), "Among NT scholars there is almost universal agreement that Jesus performed what he and his contemporaries regarded as miraculous healings and exorcisms." Many of these scholars, though, would not concede that Jesus actually performed supernatural feats. For example, though Fredriksen believes Jesus healed the sick, she also is adamant that she "does not believe that God occasionally suspends the operation of what Hume called 'natural law.'" Fredriksen, Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, p. 114. Nevertheless, placing the origin of Jesus' miracles with Jesus himself is a significant historical conclusion. As such, I provide here a demonstrative sampling of respected scholars and their conclusions on the subject:

• "Any fair reading of the Gospels and other ancient sources (including Josephus) inexorably leads to the conclusion that Jesus was well known in his time as a healer and exorcist. The miracle stories are now treated seriously and are widely accepted by Jesus scholars as deriving from Jesus' ministry. Several specialized studies have appeared in recent years, which conclude that Jesus did things that were viewed as 'miracles'." B.D. Chilton and C.A. Evans (eds.), Authenticating the Activities of Jesus, pp. 11-12 (NTTS, 28.2; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1998).

• "[T]he tradition that Jesus did perform exorcisms and healings (which may also have been exorcisms originally) is very strong." R.H. Fuller, Interpreting the Miracles, p. 39.

• "[B]y far the deepest impression Jesus made upon his contemporaries was as an exorcist and a healer. . . . In any case he was not only believed to possess some quite special curative gifts but evidently, in some way or other he actually possessed them." Michael Grant, An Historian's Review of the Gospels, pp. 31, 35.

• "Yes, I think that Jesus probably did perform deeds that contemporaries viewed as miracles." Paula Fredriksen, Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, p. 114.

• "There is no doubt that Jesus worked miracles, healed the sick and cast out demons." Gerd Theissen, The Miracle Stories of the Early Christian Tradition, p. 277.

• "In most miracle stories no explanation at all is given; Jesus simply speaks or acts and the miracle is done by his personal power. This trait probably reflects historical fact." Morton Smith, Jesus the Magician, p. 101.

• "There is agreement on the basic facts: Jesus performed miracles, drew crowds and promised the kingdom to sinners." E.P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, p. 157.

• "Yes, we can be sure that Jesus performed real signs which were interpreted by his contemporaries as experiences of an extraordinary power." H. Hendrickx, The Miracle Stories and the Synoptic Gospels, p. 22.

• "That Jesus performed deeds that were perceived as miracles by both him and his audience is difficult to doubt." Witherington, The Christology of Jesus, page 155.

• "[W]e must be clear that Jesus' contemporaries, both of those who became his followers and those who were determined not to become his followers, certainly regarded him as possessed of remarkable powers." Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God , p. 187.

• "[T]he tradition of Jesus' miracles has too many unusual features to be conveniently ascribed to conventional legend-mongering. Moreover, many of them contain details of precise reporting which is quite unlike the usual run of legends and is difficult to explain unless it derives from some historical recollection; and the gospels themselves show a remarkable restraint in their narratives which contrasts strangely with that delight in the miraculous for its own sake which normally characterizes the growth of legend." A.E. Harvey, Jesus and the Constraints of History, p. 100.

VI. Conclusion

The miracle stories of Jesus originated very early, contained reports not likely to have been created by early Christians, and cohere well with the rest of what we know about Jesus and his ministry. The best explanation for this evidence is that Jesus was known during his life as a miracle worker. The uniqueness of such miracle working adds significant weight to this conclusion and leads us to the further conclusion that the feats of Jesus must have been impressive. Though, as Carrier points out, Jesus lived in a time of superstition and religiosity, his miracles are uniquely attested. No other person of that time period has anything close to the attestation Jesus receives as a miracle worker. Accordingly, even if your philosophical predispositions preclude you from believing that Jesus actually performed miracles that violated the laws of nature, it should be admitted that he performed feats that convinced his contemporaries that he did such deeds.

3

How to Quit Church Without Quitting God: 7 Good Reasons to Escape the Box

by yaddayadda in

jw
friends

found the above titled book while surfing amazon.

looks worth a read, might buy.

anyone here read it?

yaddayadda

Found the above titled book while surfing Amazon. Looks worth a read, might buy. Anyone here read it?

One reviewer said:

"...Don't get me wrong, I like the book and would recommend it. The chapters on God does not live in Boxes, the Church digs People into Spiritual Ruts, and the Church binds People to clocks and Buildings are insightful and excellently argued. Taken as a whole it is a good read and can cause the reader to see things in a different light that is based on truth instead of institution. An excellent book that is part of what are probably the three best books on the problems of the church today. The other two books would be "Messy Spirituality" and "When Bad Christians happen to Good People". Every Christian who realizes that something isn't quite right about the way the Christian religion is practiced today should read these three books."

14

Parents congregation disbanding

by New Worldly Translation in

jw
friends

my parents told me that the do has advised the cong that it's going to close due to there not being enough publishers in it (why didn't he just say people .

it is a very small cong with about 35 people in it but they have enough elders and everyone was happy being in it.

apart from being dubs they actually are a genuinely nice bunch of people and i feel a bit sorry for them having to get split up against their wishes.. the hall is split into two congs, with the other half having about 140 publishers, and i asked why they didn't just ask some from the other half to support theirs.

yaddayadda

"He was re-instated in a blisteringly short space of time after showing remorse and several of the elders disagreed with this decision and the fact that no secular authorities were advised and so formed another cong."

Can elders really do that...just go and form another congo because of some issue in the current one they are in? I thought all those decisions came from the Branch, CO, etc?

Totally understand their reasons to form their own.

52

What happened between Jesus death & the gospels being written?

by yaddayadda in

hi, i'm interested in researching this subject.

can anyone recommend any good books that offer critical theories on the origins of early christianity, specifically the content and creation of the gospels.

for instance, how much of the gospels is underlying historical truth and how much might be exaggerations that crept in through, say 'chinese whispers' in the time between jesus death and the writing of the gospels ?

yaddayadda

Free2beme: "Everything I have ever read, that showed me otherwise was written by someone with the bias attempt to want to prove Christianity right, as it was their faith of choice. Just remember, the bible is the approved books of the day and not the only ones. There are many more missing, that would enlighten people to see how much of it was legend and without common threads."

(Sorry, can't put the above in quotes as this website isn't very compatible with Mozilla firefox)

It's impossible to approach the subject with total objectivity...everyone brings their biases, favouritism, predispositions, justifications. Sceptics and atheists say that Christians accept the gospels because of a type of wishful thinking, but the Christians say that the sceptics only deny them because they don't want the moral responsibility that goes with believing. Who has the stronger motive to accept or deny? I don't know. Admittedly all the authors of the books I'm going to read are apparently Christians; but I intend to research the 'Jesus seminar' side of the story as well, don't worry about that. On the question of historicity, it's my understanding that there have been independent historians and scholars with no apparent agenda who have declared the gospels and Pauline writings as meeting all the standard criteria and tests for declaring ancient documents as historical or not. In fact, I've read that many have said that the gospels are much better attested than any other writings of antiquity, certainly in terms of the sheer volume of manuscripts available and how far back they go. There is really only one thing that causes people to reject the gospels, and it's not whether they have an essential core layer of historical truth. Practically all sceptical scholars at least admit there is at least a certain layer of truth in them (the question is how deep is that layer). What puts people off acceptingthe gospels as genuine is that they contain miracles. I can understand scepticism about believing claims of miracles two thousand years ago when no ones seen any ever since. That's natural scepticism. Even Thomas refused to believe in the resurrection until he had tangible proof before his own eyes. The point is if you take away the miracles there would be no question that they are historical.

I'm sure that there are a range of mythological writings comtemporaneous with the gospels, but those documents clearly stand out as mythological for a number of reasons. From the snapshots of research I've gained so far, most scholars state that the gospels are different in a number of important ways from contemporaneous mythological writings, but that's something I need to really research thoroughly, as I intend to......