Posts by CalebInFloroda

9

Public Prayers - Scriptural?

by OverlappingGeneralizations in

something that has always been a pet peeve of mine- public prayers.

is that even scriptural?

i know many churches (along with the jws) do it.

CalebInFloroda

The Scriptures are filled with examples of approved public prayers.

20

If God exists ....

by iconoclastic in

if god exists, he must be a god of freedom.

because he has endowed us with free-will, and never interferes with it (as confirmed by our own experiences).

that means he wants everyone to make their choice and reap the fruits accordingly.

Of course there are significant differences between the G-d of the Hebrews and the Christian God. In Western countries many (though not all) atheists are rejecting the Christian concept. To illustrate how different the two concepts are:

The Jewish G-d evolves as does the Jewish people’s understanding of G-d.
This is the opposite of the Christian view that their Trinity God does not change, is unchangeable, and has no need for change. It also allows Christians to claim as heretical anyone who wishes to introduce an evolved view of their God.

In Judaism, G-d is unknowable.
This is also very different from Christianity. Through Jesus Christ, say Christians, God can be understood. Jesus, they claim, is the perfect reflection of what God is. If you know Jesus then you know God.

To the Hebrews, G-d welcomes arguments from his servants.
Christians believe that God should be listened to and obeyed without question, but from Abraham onward Jews are known for their very unique relationship with G-d, which includes things like debating, bargaining, and like Jacob (whose name was changed to Israel for doing this), wrestling with G-d. This is why Jews are known as the children of “Israel” and not “Abraham.” A relationship with G-d is to be explored and dealt with like any other relationship for Jews, with no need or desire to surrender just because the other person you are dealing with is your Creator.

G-d is…
While we just acknowledged that the Creator is “unknowable” to Jews, there are few things G-d “is” that can even rub Christians and others the wrong way.

To Jews, G-d is not recognized as a “he” or “she.” In fact the Hebrew pronoun for G-d, which unfortunately gets rendered as “he” in English in many Gentile translations, is actually a neuter pronoun. That is why you often hear Jews say “G-d does things on G-d’s own terms” instead of “God does things on his own terms.”
Some Jews believe that G-d is the literal Universe, while other Jews believe G-d contains the Universe while at the same time being infinitely greater. Some say that all conflicting concepts about G-d can be true at the same time. But in the end all agree that this does not change the fact that in the end G-d is both ultimately unknowable and even unnamable.

To Jews, G-d is not necessarily perfect, complete, or all-loving.
This may shock many, but it is true. Some Jewish theology suggests that G-d created humanity in order to challenge G-d to become better at being just, loving, and perfect. This is also the reason why the concept of G-d has changed over the centuries among Jews. The ideas presented in Biblical narrative, which Christians view unchangeable, Jews consider to be sometimes primitive and infantile and incomplete views of G-d. The idea of G-d being merely a monotheistic imageless Deity is “so 4000 years ago!” G-d has acted in ways in the past that G-d would never act like today or tomorrow. And Jews once held ideas about G-d that they would never accept as applicable today.

Jews can even be humanistic or secular which can include atheist and agnostic convictions or responses to the Jewish G-d concept. That is one thing that cannot be compatible with Christianity.

Disclaimer: The above is in no way intended to suggest that any who currently claim to be atheists are not because they have not fully reviewed what other religious concepts completely entail. On the contrary, the above is meant to demonstrate how the Christian view has often dominated the Jewish view to the point that many reject the Jewish concept of the Creator without realizing there are striking differences.

15

"--want to survive Armageddon?-- the start partaking--

by prologos in

jesus: the gt will be cut short for the sake of the "chosen ones" the sealed anointed).

unless those days are cut short no flesh will be saved.

how can you be saved without being a chosen one, be a chosen one without partaking?.

CalebInFloroda

It's true.

All Christians partook of the bread and wine of communion, especially at the start. Later there developed those who did it annually, and even later that was simplified to receiving only the host in the form of bread or tincture, but all Christians partook of "communion."

This is based on the fact that all Jews partake of the matzos (unleavened bread) and wine at a Passover Seder. All who are redeemed partake. Those who do not are cut off. Christians could not be Christians unless they partook of communion.--1 Corinthians 5.7, 8.

What the Jehovah's Witnesses do is totally weird. Even atheist and agnostic Jews that I know get together with their families on Passover and partake. I don't understand how "not partaking" can be a sign that you "belong" to anything. If you are going to sit on your chair and just watch, don't come. I wouldn't let you come to my Seder and just sit and watch. Even if you are not a Jew, you have to join in. The Witness thing is so anti-Biblical, anti- Christian, anti-Jewish that it is ignorance.

If you get invited to a Memorial and you believe in Christ, you had better eat and drink. Any host would kick you out for insulting them by not eating.

1

How does God measure up to the definition of love at 1st Corinthians?

by purrpurr in

we all know the famous scripture of 13:4-8. the wt uses it to show how jw's ought to behave and think.

it's like a golden standard.. but i was thinking, how does god himself measure up to this standard?

in the bible it clearly states that god is jealous.

CalebInFloroda

Jews don't believe that the G-d of Abraham and Sarah is perfect in love, not yet anyway. Some of our theology suggests that the reason we exist is so G-d could learn how to love better. Humanity evolves, and if humanity was created in G-d's image, why doesn't G-d evolve as well?

It is Christianity that defines G-d as "all-loving," "unchangeable," "perfect." It isn't that Jews don't also see this as part of the entire G-d concept they hold in their theology. It is just far more advanced and dimensional than that.

One of the texts that Jews use as the basis for this theology is Numbers 15 where a man is put do death by stoning for picking up wood on the Sabbath. G-d not only demands stoning but the Jewish people themselves carry out the judgment.

Think about it. There was no previous law stated that the man could have avoided if he knew about it. The law is promulgated after the man gathers the wood, as well as the penalty. It was a cruel and unforgiving judgment, and Judaism recognizes this, so much so that we never forgot it and made it a part of our Law.

Today things are different in regard to G-d and Jews. Today such an action by the Jewish people would be unjust (though this doesn't mean there aren't some among us Jews who believe we should be as unbending with those we view as enemies). The Jewish concept of G-d is that we have evolved because G-d has evolved, and that neither of us engages in stoning people or demanding such stoning. We've grown up, but we also acknowledge we've both grown up together--and sometimes out of very dark pasts.

Jews reject the simplistic idea of a "perfect" G-d. They view such concepts as infantile, dysfunctional and immature, much like the idealistic image one has of their parents that gets crushed by reality as they become adults themselves. Who makes up these false images of their parents? We do. Our parents are not to blame for failing to live up to our childish expectations, and neither is G-d (though Christians would have you think differently).

Like Moses, we feel we each have something to offer in making G-d more complete, even changing his mind from doing something. (Exodus 32.14) In the Jewish view we DO NOT "LISTEN AND OBEY." We argue, debate, challenge, and wrestle with G-d. (Genesis 18.22-33; Jonah 4; Genesis 32.23-31) We are indeed in a covenant together, us and G-d, but we are in it together.

We as humans have a drive to challenge ourselves at times, to become more than what we are now, to refuse to be satisfied in our current state. True, not everyone has these drives, but many do. If humans have them, then why not G-d if we are made in the image of our Creator?

69

Why Me?

by John Aquila in

do you ever wonder why out of all the witnesses, you are the one that woke up?

i wonder many times why me.

i know many men and women that are much, much better persons than me; either they are much smarter, more humble, kinder, more successful, or just better persons all around.

CalebInFloroda

@done4good

You misunderstand.

While we are agreeing that the days and/or years the person remaining in denial are not periods of "cognitive dissonance," I was stating that some others have made the mistake of saying that these long periods of being in denial are "cognitive dissonance" in themselves.

Long periods of denial can be caused by cognitive dissonance, but they aren't the same thing.

As for my pastor friend, she did not dig in deeper, she let go of it as soon as she had a moment to herself to look at the matter. The days following 9/11 were not days of "refusal to let go" as she compartmentalized the situation to avoid confronting the cognitive dissonance. But after about two weeks she had time to herself, discussed it with friends like me, and discarded these views as illogical when she could. Before it was not possible.

Many people had to compartmentalize to get through those days. Rescue workers at the scenes of destruction had to compartmentalize their fears and frustration and just work as if on "automatic" like my pastor friend. Most didn't have the luxury of stopping tand dealing with their situation. Some stayed in this mode for quite some time because that is what they had to do.

This is not the same as denial as one does in an ideology when faced with facts that conflict with one's thoughts. These people were moved by a sense of duty to complete their jobs which they vowed to perform. Rescue workers consisted of police, firefighters, and others like clergy who had to do their jobs without thinking of themselves.

My friend had to selflessly think of others for days before stopping to consider her own self and struggles. This was not "digging in deeper." This was done out of her duty to serve the public. What Witnesses do is a selfish choice to avoid dealing with the cognitive dissonance. What my friend did was very different.

But to clarify, my statements were mainly directed at the way others have been using the term. Your use of "collective cognitive dissonance" implied that an ideology thrives on this, wherein the reality is that they thrive because they don't deal with it or take steps to avoid situations that cause the dissonance in the first place. That made me feel I should add something lest someone make the mistake as to what this dissonance was.

69

Why Me?

by John Aquila in

do you ever wonder why out of all the witnesses, you are the one that woke up?

i wonder many times why me.

i know many men and women that are much, much better persons than me; either they are much smarter, more humble, kinder, more successful, or just better persons all around.

CalebInFloroda

@done4good

Great comments. One thing you brought out I thought I should mention.

I often read a lot of people make use of the term "cognitive dissonance," using it in reference to Jehovah's Witnesses. In reality, most people who use that term are using it wrong.

"Cognitive dissonance" first of all is a scientific hypothesis, used to describe mental stress which can cause emotional responses of survival. It actually has little to do with why people are in cults or ideological groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses, and it isn't universally accepted in behavioral science.

"Cognitive dissonance" is what a good friend of mine experienced on 9/11. She is a pastor of a Protestant church, with a theology that embraces the belief that America is a "Christian" nation, under G-d. When the attacks occurred against the Pentagon and the Twin Towers, she went into a daze for several days. It isn't that she stopped doing her work as a pastor. In fact she was even more busy than normal due to many people having questions, the need to add additional services, etc.

But my pastor friend confided in me that she was running on automatic. She had to, as the experience shook her faith to the foundations. "How could G-d allow such a thing to happen?" she said, explaining the connection between the events and why she was just "going through the motions." She believed that America was part of G-d's plan, a sort of "Promised Land" in the great scheme of things. As such America was supposed to be untouchable in her mind.

What that pastor was going through is "cognitive dissonance." She had two conflicting states she was dealing with: the first, a strong Christian faith that saw the United States of America as a nation protected by Providence and second, the fact that the U.S. had undergone a horrific terrorist attack of such a grand scale never before seen on American soil.

That is "cognitive dissonance," that state of two separate conflicting "truths" that the pastor was dealing with. Because she was a pastor of a church, she had to compartmentalize the mental battle and run on "automatic."

Granted, I don't subscribe to her unique view of the U.S. in G-d's "plan," but beside that the woman was quite mainstream. She fought for equal rights for the poor, the disabled, the LGBT community, and ministered to those with HIV and AIDS. In fact she was quite sensible and logical that it surprised me to hear her tell me she had this belief and that it was causing her such a crisis of conscience. It still doesn't fit the picture of the woman I know.

Cognitive dissonance doesn't keep a person in a state of denial either. It usually makes a person choose one path or the other, true, but often "wakes" people up. My pastor friend ditched this theological view, but still remains a faithful Christian minister to this day.

If cognitive dissonance is as real as most believe it is (and I am one of those who feel the theory has merit), then Jehovah's Witnesses are not in this state. If they ever were, they chose the path of accepting the Watchtower brand of ideology. But it is more likely that they don't listen to anything that causes this state of stress in the first place. People cannot thrive under such stress. They shut down.

What people may be trying to say is that some JWs are compartmentalizing when and if they have to endure a moment of cognitive dissonance. That is not healthy either, but it is putting something "on a back burner" to deal with later, so to speak. Eventually the pot will boil over and the stress will build and they will have to make a choice.

But cognitive dissonance is not denial. It is the state that usually gets one to realize they have possibly been in denial.

69

Why Me?

by John Aquila in

do you ever wonder why out of all the witnesses, you are the one that woke up?

i wonder many times why me.

i know many men and women that are much, much better persons than me; either they are much smarter, more humble, kinder, more successful, or just better persons all around.

CalebInFloroda

There is another possibility, John, and it may not be easy for you to swallow at this point.

I never asked the questions you are asking. One of my best friends who left has never asked them either. I have several friends who were in the Watchtower, and only 1 out of 15 ever brought this up.

This is the point where you might get mad if I say anymore, and it's a normal response. Usually when you tell a person what I am about to say you get a lot of denial, anger, hostility, and in some cases even hateful and violent responses. So take a deep breath...

What you are experiencing is called "survivor's guilt," and it's not uncommon for people who have survived traumatic events like disasters, car accidents, plane crashes, and even escaping cults. Some Holocaust survivors have it, and it was the experience of the main character in the novel and film "Ordinary People" for which Timothy Hutton won an Oscar.

"Survivor's guilt" is a symptom of post-traumatic stress syndrome. It's generally characterized by asking "why me?" Survivors often believe they were not good enough to survive and that others deserved it more. They can blame G-d for not being there to save "more worthy" people. It can be accompanied with other forms of distress like unipolar disorder.

Now I am not a psychologist or medical doctor, and I can't say for sure that you are dealing with this, but it's not uncommon. Sometimes the only symptom is anger.

The truth of the matter is that many factors play a part in why some people survive and some don't. I'm not the one to go into a full discussion about this because if there is a slight possibility you may be showing signs of PTS syndrome, you should see a medical doctor. It can be as destructive as the disaster or cult if not treated.

Not everyone feels this way. And not everybody who "wakes up" chooses or has the courage to leave. And, to be honest, not everyone is really "asleep" in cults. There's still debate about it, and probably always will be, but there may be a lot more free will and less brainwashing in systems like the Watchtower than people would like to believe. The only experience you need to worry about and can is yours.

39

The Vedas - Scientific Knowledge - Prophecy - The Truth?

by LAWHFol in

the vedas are the core sacred texts for the people of the east.

generally the vedas are to the east as the hebrew scriptures are to the west.

supporters of the bible, boast of it's scientific accuracy,prophetic accuracy & general infallibility.

CalebInFloroda

My thought is what's this obsession with raising a written work to the status of revelation?

Joseph Smith claims to find a book of gold plates that becomes The Book of Mormon...

Charles Taze Russell decides that the Bible is the basis for all doctrine and religious practices...

L. Ron Hubbard publishes Dianetics, and the book is studied and practiced by Scientologists everywhere...

What is it with enlightenment from a book?

Even the Jewish Bible is not used by Jews as if it were the ultimate revelation from G-d, the final say on science, religion, morals, taxes, etc. You will find Christians using our religious texts this way, but not us.

So what's the big obsession with making a book of any kind the font of knowledge? The ultimate rule? I don't get it.

11

Judgement

by davidmitchell in

https://jwleaks.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/2015-ewhc-1722-qb.pdfjust had a look at this 2015 legal judgement.

one of a number of things that caught my eye was the statement in (11) that "the organisational structure of jehovahs witnesses is modelled on first century christianity as described in the bible".er, hardly.

try acts 2: 44-45"all the believers were together and had everything in common.

CalebInFloroda

Acts 2.44-45 is speaking of Jewish Christians who still lived as part of the world of Jewry.

These Christians lived in Jerusalem and unlike Gentile Christians observed the Mosaic Law as stated in Acts 21.17-26. In a Torah-observant world these Christians were able to and even encouraged by Mosaic Law to share what they owned with the less-fortunate among them. Read in this context the verses in Acts 2 are stating that these Jews helped fellow believers in Jesus of Nazareth among them as a priority. It does not mean they ignored other non-Christian Jews who under Torah they were obliged to help assist, nor is there any indications that Gentile Christians ever did the exact same thing in their communities or were even capable of doing something similar. JWs are not capable of imitating first-century Christianity as they had no New Testament at the time and were governed by an apostolic college that was composed mainly of Jewish Christians that still saw themselves obliged to observe Torah.

Luke 14.25-33 are a series of hyperboles. Jesus is not demanding a literal application of verse 33 otherwise he would be asking to literally hate their parents and undergo literal crucifixion. It would not be fair to judge JWs by failing to apply this text literally.

It would also be illogical to demand a literal application of Matthew 5.42. This section of the Sermon the Mount, Matthew 5.38-42, also employs hyperbole. The text is speaking about avoiding retaliation, not actually telling people how to give in charitable ways. If people applied this literally they could go bankrupt themselves. The "giving" is not the primary point of verse 42, it imeans not refusing anyone who is asking. In other words be as cooperative as you can, even going that extra mile, to avoid situations that might tempt you to retaliate, and do this with anyone who may push you in this direction.

While I have no love for the JWs, it does no good to misapply Scripture as they do and judge them according to failed and untested exegesis.

39

The Vedas - Scientific Knowledge - Prophecy - The Truth?

by LAWHFol in

the vedas are the core sacred texts for the people of the east.

generally the vedas are to the east as the hebrew scriptures are to the west.

supporters of the bible, boast of it's scientific accuracy,prophetic accuracy & general infallibility.

CalebInFloroda

Actually the New Testament is a product of what we now call Western Civilization.

The Tanakh, which Christians call the Old Testament, is actually a product of Eastern thought. Even the Jewish exegesis of it is far different than what is claimed by Christians...

1. The Scriptures are scientifically accurate.

Not in the eyes of Jews. The Scriptures are not the basis for our religion or culture, but a product of these two things. They reflect ancient ways of thinking, employ old and unscientific cosmogonies, even its views on G-d are ancient and primitive when compared with modern Jewish thought,

2. If the Bible is flawed, G-d is flawed.

Again, a Christian thought. The G-d of Abraham and Sarah is not perfect in the way Christians demand and define perfection. In Jewish theology and Scripture G-d is evolving with humanity and learns how to love properly and deal more justly through interchange with humanity. In Judaism it is not wrong to say that it seems G-d created humanity to fill a need in order to move beyond what was lacking in the Creator.

3. Abrahamic Faith

Faith and belief are irrelevant concepts to Jews. We don't "believe" in G-d in any manner similar to Christians who believe it is a requisite to have faith in G-d's existence. Instead G-d is encountered, responded to, interacted with, even challenged. There is no such thing as the "Abrahamic faith." Jews are in a covenant with G-d, and this leaves some of them in active participation with the Creator and others guessing at G-d as agnostics and other Jews dealing with the G-d concept as atheists. But each Jew still remains part of the Tribe, and each can still fully participate in its rich spiritual tradition, theology, and work together to fulfill the aims of Tikklun Olam.

4. Truth is found in written texts.

That is too limited a concept for the children of Abraham and Sarah. Truth can be found where we least expect it. Even the Hebrew Scriptures are not the basis of religious truth, as our "truth" existed for centuries before we wrote them down as Scripture. Our religion was totally functioning with a theology and Temple before Scripture was complete. In fact Scripture was an afterthought, not the beginning for us.

So yes, one can probably find many truths from sources like the Vedas. But you may need to revise your views about the Scriptures of the Hebrews. They are tied to a very foreign theology that many Christians are still ignorant of after 2000 years. Some of your comments about them are in need of a bit revision.