Posts by AuldSoul

61

A reminder for Witnesses who deny this

by gumby in

here's a precious little gem for jehovahs witnesses who deny what their organisation really teaches.. when they are directly asked..." do you believe your the only ones who will be saved"?

they try and wiggle out of it with some vague, obscure answer.

below is what they really believe.. watchtower 1989 september 1 p. 19 remaining organized for survival into the millennium .

AuldSoul

Schizm, if you won't respond to the questions and arguments of others it shouldn't surprise you that they will not respond to yours. Mine was rhetorical, so obviously I am not referring to that.

How do you understand Pauls expression of an experience (either his own or that of an acquaintence) involving the "third heaven"/"paradise"?

However, there is a little piece of business I left in another thread recently. LittleToe has asked this before as well, but JWs don't answer it. Please remember, this is a discussion forum. Just because LittleToe asked the question doesn't mean that others are disinterested in your answer. Jehovah's Witnesses seem ready to take their toys and go home, like a petulant child, if anyone asks a question that makes them think.

Now, the Jews teach that the Third Heaven is the Highest Heaven, i.e. the dwelling place of God. Paul called that third heaven "paradise." The word "paradise" occurs in four verses in the New World Translation. The three in the NT are Luke 23:43; 2 Corinthians 12:4; Revelation 2:7.

Of these, 2 Corinthians specifically ties paradise to the highest heaven (unless you believe Gamaliel's star pupil didn't know what "third heaven"). Revelation says that the paradise of God is where "the tree of life" is. Wow! It was lost in Genesis and shows up again in the third heaven. That is incredible!

Maybe now we know where Adam and Eve were cast out of? <—— Just kidding.

AuldSoul

61

A reminder for Witnesses who deny this

by gumby in

here's a precious little gem for jehovahs witnesses who deny what their organisation really teaches.. when they are directly asked..." do you believe your the only ones who will be saved"?

they try and wiggle out of it with some vague, obscure answer.

below is what they really believe.. watchtower 1989 september 1 p. 19 remaining organized for survival into the millennium .

AuldSoul

Schizm, I only nip at the heels of my betters. So, no, I am not nipping at your heels. However, since you have deigned to comment directly to me, I will take the opportunity to ask you a direct question:

If you know your views are contrary to the Bible as taught by Jehovah's Witnesses and you know Jehovah's Witnesses say that make you an apostate, why do you refuse to admit being what they believe you are?

You can consider this a rhetorical question if you like. When you answer that one for yourself, then you will know why others here find it ironic that you assert your opinions of us as incontrovertible fact and label us so freely. What you said to fairchild applies equally to you. You seem too obtuse to recognize it.

AuldSoul

14

WikipediaFaithful and Discreet Slave

by AuldSoul in

jw
friends

thoughts?

comments?.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/faithful_and_discreet_slave.

AuldSoul

Thoughts? Comments?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithful_and_Discreet_Slave

AuldSoul

61

A reminder for Witnesses who deny this

by gumby in

here's a precious little gem for jehovahs witnesses who deny what their organisation really teaches.. when they are directly asked..." do you believe your the only ones who will be saved"?

they try and wiggle out of it with some vague, obscure answer.

below is what they really believe.. watchtower 1989 september 1 p. 19 remaining organized for survival into the millennium .

AuldSoul

LittleToe: Do you really just not get the idea of a "Discussion" board?

At present, Schizm sees only a hazy outline as if a reflection in a metal mirror...

AuldSoul

39

How long would it take? (Physics question, sort of. Maybe)

by AlmostAtheist in

jw
friends

let's say i've got a length of solid material that is one light year long.

it's just hanging there in space, between galaxies, not affected by gravity enough at any point along its length to be twisted, bent, whatever.

let's also say that it is resistent to flexing.. i'm at one end of this impossibly-existing rod, and you are at the other.

AuldSoul

Mass in "stasis" while in total vaccuum has no resitive force in and of itself. "...Body at rest tends to stay at rest..." only applies when you have less than total vaccuum and where other mass exerts gravitational force to maintain a seeming constancy of current state. Introdution of propulsive force into a total vaccuum will alter position of matter in direction exactly opposite the propulsive force but nothing will stop the now moving object except an opposite force. Even striking another object would not stop the movement, it would only (possibly) alter its direction.

Inertia into the equation as a factor when force is applied to one end. There was zero inertia, resting or otherwise, prior to application of force to one end. Whatever inertia was generated by the initial application of force becomes the total inertia in the closed hypothetical system. Without any resistive force that initial inertia is purely applied to the entire rod simultaneously.

Of course, in hypothetical terms, I question whether matter as we know it could possibly exist in total vaccuum. I enjoyed reading Asimov's fictional tales involving total vaccuum. He hypothesized that billiards can be deadly when played across a field of total vaccuum, that any moving matter introduced into total vaccuum would immediately accellerate to the speed of light.

AuldSoul

39

How long would it take? (Physics question, sort of. Maybe)

by AlmostAtheist in

jw
friends

let's say i've got a length of solid material that is one light year long.

it's just hanging there in space, between galaxies, not affected by gravity enough at any point along its length to be twisted, bent, whatever.

let's also say that it is resistent to flexing.. i'm at one end of this impossibly-existing rod, and you are at the other.

AuldSoul

I don't mean to be a monkeywrench in the works, but I think you are all making a lot of assumptions. Simultaneity is non-existent in reality. Movement, distance, time; they are each relative to something else. There is no constant by which to measure any of these, but only relative to something else which is itself inconstant.

If we assume (1) total vaccuum, (2) zero gravity except that exerted by the rod itself—which in total vaccuum would be concentrated at the center and through the core of the rod, (3) assume there is a mechanism at either end for tracking movement and marking time of movement which has no gravity—which cannot exist (but for sake of discussion), (4) assume there is a propelling force—which has no gravity—at one end capable of moving the rod one inch toward its other end, the movement would provably occur simultaneously.

In your previous explanations (except Darth Yhwh), there seems be an assumption that matter has to move inertially by atoms bumping into each other down the line until they all have moved to the new location. SteveNYC, your analogy would only apply if compression were occuring, in this case there is no resistance to movement (total vaccuum). However, even in real life that is not what actually occurs. A baseball doesn't bump its composite atoms against one another when hit with a bat until they have all flown over the wall together.

Rethink the puzzle in terms of a baseball (equal and opposite reaction), and especially think about the total vaccuum stipulation. Zero resistance to movement.

Of course, the problem presented has one glaring difficulty to overcome. Any propulsion in the construct provided would not possibly cause a move of only an inch. In total vaccuum you could not propel any object one inch. It will never stop moving once propelled until some resisting force causes it to stop.

AuldSoul

61

A reminder for Witnesses who deny this

by gumby in

here's a precious little gem for jehovahs witnesses who deny what their organisation really teaches.. when they are directly asked..." do you believe your the only ones who will be saved"?

they try and wiggle out of it with some vague, obscure answer.

below is what they really believe.. watchtower 1989 september 1 p. 19 remaining organized for survival into the millennium .

AuldSoul

Schizm, although I am certain it is a lost cause, have you examined Ezekiel 9 and what your organization teaches about that chapter?

(1) There are two groups: those with the mark (who will be saved) and those without the mark (who will be destroyed)

(2) The determinant for receiving the mark, according to the WTS, is actively siding with Jehovah; specifically, the mark is dedication and baptism

(3) Attention is drawn to the belief that age is no determinant

(4) Everyone without the mark, dies.

Now, there are difficulties with their interpretation that have never been addressed. For one thing, Jerusalem consistently is either applied to Christendom (if a judgment prophecy) or to Spiritual Israel (if a restoration prophecy) in every other fulfillment. In this case, magically, Jerusalem represents the entire world of ungodly mankind. This is the only place where the WTS interprets Jerusalem that way.

However, according to the current teachings of your "truthful" organization everyone who is not dedicated and baptized will die, unless their parent is dedicated and baptized; in which case Jehovah gets to decide whether they live or die dependent on whether they could have chosen to side with Jehovah.

Study it out. Is it sick? Yes. Is it truth? Hell no! Is it "false doctrine?" Yes.

Gumby, I added that reference from Road to Life to the Wikipedia article last night, under beliefs and doctrines.

AuldSoul

30

NGO/WTS scandal info sought

by yaddayadda in

some questions for someone really clued up on the ngo scandal:

who was the pr when the society first applied to be an ngo in 1992....milton henschel?

when did don adams become the president of the wts?

AuldSoul

If you read the accreditation form itself, on the last page you find the requirement for the accompanying report.

Here is the text from that page:

Please provide a one to two page typewritten overview of your organization’s information programme relating to the United Nations during the last two years. The overview should include:
Name of the organization
Brief (no more than three sentences) statement of the organization’s goals
Main area of interest (see below for guidance)
Description of the organization’s information programme as it relates to the work of the United Nations. This may include, but is not limited, to list of publications (print and/or electronic), radio or television programmes, web sites, interviews and articles by organization’s officials, seminars, and conferences. Please include an estimated number of people who receive this information.
At least three samples of information materials described above (may be mailed separately with clearly stated name of the organization)

Apparently, this portion is only necessary every four years. However, the annual accreditation form includes and has included the "Criteria for Association" so all claims of ignorance regarding them is outright deceit.

Criteria for Association of Non-governmental Organizations with DPIa) The NGO must support and respect the principles of the Charter of the United Nations;
b) The NGO must be of recognized national or international standing;
c) The NGO should operate solely on a non-for-profit basis and have tax-exempt status;
d) The NGO must have the commitment and the means to conduct effective information programmes with its constituents and to a broader audience about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets; organizing conferences, seminars and round tables; or enlisting the attention of the media;
e) The NGO should have an established record of continuity of work for a minimum of three years and should show promise of sustained activity in the future;
f) The NGO should have a satisfactory record of collaboration with UN Information Centres/Services or other parts of the UN Sys tem prior to association;
g) The NGO should provide an audited annual financial statement, conducted by a qualified, independent accountant;
h) The NGO should have statutes/bylaws providing for a transparent process of taking decisions, elections of officers and members of the Board of Directors.

AuldSoul

12

What is THIS that is stated on official WTBTS site...

by sf in

jw
friends

http://www.watchtower.org/publications/publications_available.htm.

scrolling down to bottom:.

jehovah's witnesses provide personal and group instruction in the bible at no charge.

AuldSoul

No Apologies, when I went to look at the link sf gave the Creator book was not listed. I don't know why it was pulled and then put back.

AuldSoul

8

How should the congregations be disciplined ?

by vitty in

jw
friends

i dont think disfellowshipment itself is wrong, its the enforced shunning that causes the damage.

i think a lot of posters here agree.

personally i think the public reproof is just sick and when a person is marked!.

AuldSoul

I agree with Dave's take on this. Paul was writing to the individuals in the congregation, not to the elders. Currently, the congregation in general is not aware of the reason for any action taken (although there is plenty of speculation and slander).

The Scriptural standard is to "reprove before all onlookers." (1 Timothy 5:20) Including older men who sin. Paul put it into practice on the occasion of Peter separating himself from the Gentiles when the men from James arrived.

But now, they call it "public reproof" when they announce the sentence on the individual who sinned. Reproof is the counsel, not the sentencing. But that is kept behind closed doors before three men. Everyone else has to accept those men judged rightly, so there is no opportunity for exercise of personal conscience.

The fact is, the way Jehovah's Witnesses handle "gross wrongdoing" is incredibly different from the examples shown in the Bible. There is no instance in the Bible of a judicial committee being arranged to act on behalf of the congregation in the matter of judging right from wrong and sentencing. These men, knowingly or in ignorance, set themselves up to judge their "brother" and "sister" for the entire congregation without one ounce of authority to do so.

They draw comparison to the arrangement Christ dissolved. In other words, there is more similarity between the congregational arrangement of Jehovah's Witnesses and the arrangement under the Mosaic Law. That Law was described as a burden that Christ freed us from.

AuldSoul