Posts by cosmic

20

How long were slaughtered animals to be bled for?

by Gill in

in the topic of 'jws and dairy products' i was beginning to wonder why there were no guidlines in the bible as to 'how long' and animal had to be bled for when it was killed.

was there a specific time mentioned in the bible...or in the end, the fact that there was no specific time instructed, supposedly by god' must prove that the no blood sanction was just a symbolic gesture?

it is totally impossible to bleed every last drop of blood out of a creature, surely.

cosmic

I'm not positive about sheep and goats, but I once watched a Venezualan rancher prepare a cow for barbeque. I expected him to shoot the animal in the head, or, at the very least, club it in the head. But he had a thing that resembled a huge hypodermic needle ( although it was a min of 2 cm in diameter) that he jabbed into an artery in the cows neck ( I assume it was comparable with a human's carotid) and it took about 7 minutes for the thing to bleed to death, as the blood simply squirted out onto the ground. The animal was then hung up and butchered for the roasting. I don't know how much actual blood was left in the animals circulatory system, but I don't think there was very much. Assuming that the Israelites followed the same procedure (or approximated it) I don't think there was a lot of worry about any blood left in a sheep either. Whereas, if the animal was "strangled" (I would not want to be the clown trying to strangle a cow) I could see that a lot of blood would be left. Why would someone strangle an animal for food? Was this a common practice?

5

Saul (Paul) vs Hitler. What was the difference ?

by google_mE in

what was the difference between saul (later called paul) and hitler ?.

both had a hand in persecuting and killing people.

both thought they were doing the work of god.

cosmic

Interesting question. John Toland started his (generally accepted) definitive biography of Adolph Hitler by recounting an incident that happened to Hitler while in hospital recovering from a mustard gas attack while he was on the front line in Belgium. According to Toland, Hitler (who was temporarily blinded) learned of the armistace and capitulation by the German High Command and became severely depressed. Hitler later told others that he quickly fell into a deep sleep caused by his extreme state of depression, and while asleep he had a "vision" where an angel appeared to him and told him that he would lead Germany out of the Abyss.

Hmmm, go figure.

36

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 3-5-06 WT Study (Patience)

by blondie in

his faithful servants--only jws, not "so-called" christians.

7 a second point that we can draw from peter's words is that jehovah is patient because he desires all to attain to repentance.

"consider the patience of our lord as salvation," wrote peter to fellow christians.

cosmic

Thank you, Blondie.

From the Devil's Dictionary: Patience: a mild form of desperation, often disguised as a virtue.

I wonder if all those poor people who are being murdered and raped and are starving to death in the Sudan (and have been for years and years) are just pleased as punch that Jehovah is so bloody patient? What a crock of shite.

3

salvation & sins research

by Kristofer in

i am trying to do research on whether christ's death covered even future sins, not just original sin by adam.

anyone have helpful scriptures?

cosmic

Sins are such an important part of the concept of God. I wonder if that was done on purpose?

Aniron, that was a good job.

Kristofer, to answer your question, who cares? You know how they say that when you die you will have to stand in front of God and make an accounting for yourself? Well, except for the obvious causation of the meeting, that's a conversation that I am looking forward to, because it will by no means be a one way discussion. And it may be a matter of nanoseconds before He pulls whatever lever there is that sends my butt to Whateversville, but He will damn well know that I've been there. Until He has sweated, starved, cried, ached, and hungered in my shoes, He don't get to ask a whole lot of leading questions. Its kind of like when Marie Antoinette asks me why I didn't eat cake, we're going to have to go to the hospital together. Top remove my size nine boot from her ....

7

Why you should report your time and organize a party afterwards.

by Trojan in

this reasoning was recently used to argument why we all should fill out our monthly report slip and hand it nicely to the secretary.

the elder explaining this used the organization book and starts mentioning the bible accounts that include numbers and figures in them!

judges 7:7 - gideon gets 300 men to drink water...

cosmic

apostlestate, absolutely, quite astute. Here, here.

In furtherance of apostlestates observation, I have two questions on this thread (if this is grounds for being accused of hijacking, I apologize, that is not my intention).

1. Since the WTS uses 2 (and only 2) scriptures from the Bible to condem birthdays because, in neither case, the birthday result in no "good". Why is the same logic not applied to counting?

2. Why do you suppose the WTS is so fixedly anal about FS hours anyway?

4

Is electing a new farmer going to solve the pig farm's bad smell?

by DavidChristopher in

why does this line of thinking hold so much wieght?

i cannot understand why people think and are content thinking just because a farmer promises to quell the smell, he doesn't need to present a clear and consise plan for dealing with the smell, and if his promises and ideas are junk, he still gets to hold on to his title for years.

or does the farmer not hold the authority to quell the smell in reality?

cosmic

It seems that the "farmer" in your question is symbolic, if not, my apologies. It isn't clear whether you are referring to GB or THE GB, but the distinction may be immaterial. What you are asking, IMHO, is not a question of the way things work as much as it is a question of human nature. Probably, at its core, the issue is the same as wondering why ponography is the leading industry on the internet, why the greatest concern among western youth is whether their telephones can take pictures, and why, after removing the commercials, the "opinions", the fluff and gossip, that out of a 24 hour day, CNN has approximately 37.5 minutes of actual news. It is what some have called the "fantasy" factor.

Lenny Bruce did a bit where he advised men to never to admit they ever did anything wrong to their woman. "Even if she catches you in bed with another woman, tell her, 'I don't know who this woman is. She just burst into the room, naked, saying that she was freezing to death, so I jumped on her to save her life!'" He went on to explain that your woman would believe you. Why? "Because she WANTS to believe you." (Of course, a week later the man will find himself dodging dishes, silverware, and other handy kitchen implements while his same wife screams at him because he didn't take the garbage out when she asked him to. And, being gender inhibited, he never connects the dots, so he sits in the neighborhood pub and grouses to his mates about how crazy women are.) But then, these same men will sit comfortably on the sofa wearing beer stains on their three day old tshirt while they balance the bag of potato chips on the ridge of their swollen, Homer Simpson like gut, while ignoring everything but the football on the telly, and warmly believe their wives who tell them, "Of course I love you!"

The farmer doesn't have to present a plan because, well, he doesn't have to. We don't want plans, we don't want reality, we want to FEEL good. There was a most admirable vice presidential candidate (stalwart, war hero, forthright, honest, level headed, etc.) who had been judged as a detriment to his running mate because commtting the one unforgiveable sin in America: he was bad on TV. As far as American Presidents are concerned, the question you ask has always been asked: is the job of the President to lead? That is, was he elected to see a vision for America and follow it, to set the wheels of government in motion to get from here to there? Or is he elected to obey "the voice of the people", that is, to follow? It probably depends on his poll numbers.

As regards the farmer in the guise of THE GB, you have the historic question of "kingship". Presidents are (by theory) elected by the people, therefore everyone shares blame when he screws up. Kings, on the other hand, are chosen by God, and therefore, we get what we get and we live with it. In this case, the farmer doesn't have to come up with a plan because he isn't answerable to anyone BUT God. Now, in the case of THE GB, it seems that there is a president who is appointed by God by being elected by men; however, I may not be totally accurate in my description, since I've never been privvy to such an occurance. The downside of the kingship aspect, however, is something to which God never seems to catch on (maybe He's a slow learner, but not slow as some consider slowness) namely, the "power corrupts" theory and the fact that ultimately, if God appoints a jerkoff, then God gets the blame.

So, all this being said, you will find that the farmer's "success" and, therefore the length of his tenure, will not be dependent upon his authority or how much he uses/abuses that authority to right wrongs or propel us forward in out manifest destinies, but he will be most successful who convinces the most of the rest of us that the stench is really a most pleasant aroma.

33

What do you say in response to this???????

by cr1234 in

my brother in law wants to know::: if jw's don't have the truth then where do you go to worship?

if i had something better then he would follow?

i know i have heard this before from jw's but couldn't find the thread to answer him correctly.

cosmic

Between the two choices: 2+2=5 or 2+2=6, which is better? They are both wrong, but the first one is "closer" to the truth(?). Would you want to live in a building architected with math based upon either of those?

8

Does the bible really agree with science?

by SickofLies in

here's some food for thought, many jw's point out that the bible isn't a scientific text book, but when it comments on science its always correct.

they site many examples to try and prove this.

here's some you can throw back at them:leviticus 11:6 states that rabbits chew their cud.

cosmic

Wow, your answer was inspirational, but you blew away this old sheep herder. How about: Time is not a constant, it is relative to many things. Would that work?

8

Does the bible really agree with science?

by SickofLies in

here's some food for thought, many jw's point out that the bible isn't a scientific text book, but when it comments on science its always correct.

they site many examples to try and prove this.

here's some you can throw back at them:leviticus 11:6 states that rabbits chew their cud.

cosmic

This is interesting. I understand your frustration, when someone like the WTS comes out with this broad, bomastic statement that "The Bible is science." and proceeds to offer such assininities as rabbit-cud and grasshopper legs as "proof", it doesn't exercise ones intelligence, it insults it. However, don't threw the baby out with the bath water, so to speak. DannyB, what makes you so sure that the Bible doesn't have any reference to General Relativity (or pecial Relativity, for that matter)? Would you know it if you read it? Quantum mechanics? The jury is still out on a great deal of that. I'm curious, how would you describe Relativity? I'm serious, please, just indulge me a bit and write down your description of General Relativity. It's got to encompass it's essence and be understandable, because I'm just a humble sheep herder.

14

What do you make of the Daniel Book

by lost_light06 in

i went to my first bookstudy in at least 4 weeks the other night.

we were studying the daniel book.

this particular study had to do with the king of the north and the king of the south in our modern day.

cosmic

I'm sort of new here, and I have to confess, I've been what you call "lurking" for some time, but this particular post got me interested. Leolaia, I'm overwhelmed by your answer (and the one that is linked to in your answer as well) but it made me think a bit. It seems (and I say seems because I am by no means a definitive historian) that your entire argument (and most of the other arguments mentioned) seem to be based upon the assertion(?) (fact?) that Daniel was actually written in the 2nd Century BC rather than the 6th century. The only source for the 6th century date seems to be the book itself, and then only by the implication of timings mentioned in the writting; whereas, the 2nd century date (as far as I could find out in my short research) was mostly based upon a rather unilateral decision that someone being able to guess events with such accuracy, as the book purports to do, is simply impossible. Therefore, the book had to have been written in retospect but masquerades as prophecy. Could be, I don't know, I wasn't there. But, if the book was actually written in the 2nd century, then it is a fraud, that is, kaka, bullshit, and can mean anything at all. Your explanation of Chapter 11 being about Antiochus IV and Selucidian history could just as easily be a discussion about MickeyMouseus I from Disneylandium. I'm curious, however, why, in your obvously more learned opinion, would a 2nd centiry BC fraudist choose that particular time in Jewish history about which to write all of that bullshit? I'm having a hard time understanding what the purpose of such a book would be?

As far as the question of the thread, I don't. To me, it's like a movie teaser, just enough content presented in the most vague terms, all designed to make you fill in the gaps and therefore believe that it's really meaningful. But, after you buy your ticket and popcorn, the movie turns out to be just another load of shite.