.
hi my name is alex and i was born in the truth and...i'm still in it.......i'm 15 and openly gay well at least at schooland to all my friends some who are also jw's well the reason for posting this is i wanted to knw if there were any other gay people here......if anyone wants to email me its [email protected].
i want like advice on how i should deal with this cause sometimes i feel this oppression(dont knw if i spelled that right) on being gay and also being a j.w theres this i'm not sure how to explain it....like you knw that when people in your congregation find out the ones you know all ur life are going to hate u cause ur gay............this i guess just makes me feel really sad........ kind of hoping that this made some sorta sence.................... i suck at spelling so if i miss spelled something sorry@_@
Alex my advice is don't define yourself. You might have some fears about being with a woman. It's natural. Your only 15.
You have to live outside of the JW world for a while and be really free
You will learn enough here in this forum to give you the courage to leave the WTBTS because they are not "in the truth".
You don't have to define yourself as gay to leave the WTBTS
http://www.rzim.org/publications/jttran.php?seqid=52 .
"what cannot be doubted is that many new testament critics have approached the gospels with an utterly unjustified skepticism--a skepticism that wouldn't be considered justified in any other branch of ancient history.
new testament scholar r. t. france declares that "at the level of their literary and historical character we have good reason to treat the gospels as a source of information on the life and teachings of jesus, and thus on the historical origins of christianity.
By the way, the WMDs did exist, as Sadaam used them on his own people.
Sa2ne
The WMD "existed" only because Donnie Rumsfeld went over to Baghdad for his boss Ronnie, and sold them to Saadam, to use on the Kurds - who are NOT "his own people" and the Iranians, who most certainly were not "his own people.
Since Don was well aware that the WMD had already been used, why go to war in Iraq?
P.S. The real WMD in Iraq is depleted uranium, 1000 tonnes of atomised dirty bombs viciously spread through Iraq, (as well as in Kosovo, Serbia, Bosnia, Afghanistan) by Donnie the murderer.
girls at the age of 3 were forced into sex in both the talmud and the bible.
also, the age consent in us and europe was as low as 10:.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/age3.htm.
Psalm 137:9 How blessed will be the one who grabs your babies and smashes them on a rock!
By the rivers of Babylon, where we sat down, ... How blessed will be the one who grabs your babies and smashes them on a rock.
http://www.rzim.org/publications/jttran.php?seqid=52 .
"what cannot be doubted is that many new testament critics have approached the gospels with an utterly unjustified skepticism--a skepticism that wouldn't be considered justified in any other branch of ancient history.
new testament scholar r. t. france declares that "at the level of their literary and historical character we have good reason to treat the gospels as a source of information on the life and teachings of jesus, and thus on the historical origins of christianity.
Those scholars then proceeded to use the prominence of their institutions to progressively marginalize those who did not come from the materialist point of view both from mainstream campuses and from the prestigious journals they published.
In the days of the inquisition the "materialists" would simply have been burned at the stake and then the inquisitors could claim the new consensus, the dissenters having been dematerialised.
http://www.rzim.org/publications/jttran.php?seqid=52 .
"what cannot be doubted is that many new testament critics have approached the gospels with an utterly unjustified skepticism--a skepticism that wouldn't be considered justified in any other branch of ancient history.
new testament scholar r. t. france declares that "at the level of their literary and historical character we have good reason to treat the gospels as a source of information on the life and teachings of jesus, and thus on the historical origins of christianity.
The remarkable thing is that many early Christians who were inspired by the gospels were willing to face death and torture for what they believed and that implies that the gospels were something greater than a myth.
Hi Greendawn
This argument is given throughout Christianity as "proof" of the truth of Jesus resurrection. I do not consider it to be "proof" of what they saw, rather to be proof of their faith.
both the catholic and jehovah's witness anthropomorphisize yhwh, but in reality the word should be pronounced as yawa - or ya'wa'.. in ancient sanskrit, a short "a" is the default vowel.
this is not limited to sanskrit but is a universal and generic default vowel and the most common vowel sound in most languages.
the "h" simply means that the short vowel "a" is forcefully aspirated.
"Judaism is, instead, a horribly repugnant, man-made cult based on hatred of Christ ... "
Rig Boy
I have to say that Judaism cannot be based on a hatred of Christ.
It is quite clear that the old testament was largely formalised before the time of Christ and as much of Judaism as relies upon the old testament texts cannot possibly be based on 'hatred of Christ', for the simple reason that Jesus had not yet been born.
See Is it God's Word? by Joseph Wheless (the text link is in one of my former posts in this thread with a disclaimer) for an analysis for instance in the case of the books of Moses, of how the Yahwist texts (J) from around 800B.C. and Elohist texts (E) from around 750 B.C. are coalesced into the final versions of the old testament texts, with editing by the Priests (P) by around 450 B.C.
Ancient Yahwism should in my opinion be judged according to the traditions of that day, of which it was in my opinion just as any other pagan cult.
Modern Judaism should not be confused with modern zionism either. For there are Judaists who are zionists and Judaists who are anti-zionists.
In regards to your earlier post in which you claim that Jesus is god, I simply do not believe that Jesus was God, or a God, but rather a man. Simply because Judaism rejects the Christian notion that Jesus is somehow divine, or from a virgin birth, or that his blood and his death somehow clean us of our sins, does not mean that modern Judaists hate Christ. I too reject such doctrines, and furthermore I believe that Jesus never ever taught any such doctrine. Rather he taught to love thy enemy and turn the other cheek. There are many born again Christians who would do well to remember this.
I have concluded that both Jehovah and Satan are man made imaginations, but I have also concluded that Jesus was simply a man as are all of us. I do not believe that he was simply a legend, though again I believe that his words and teachings may have been altered. Nevertheless I believe that the words of Jesus in the sermon on the mount stand on their own merits not as the word of God, but of truth.
both the catholic and jehovah's witness anthropomorphisize yhwh, but in reality the word should be pronounced as yawa - or ya'wa'.. in ancient sanskrit, a short "a" is the default vowel.
this is not limited to sanskrit but is a universal and generic default vowel and the most common vowel sound in most languages.
the "h" simply means that the short vowel "a" is forcefully aspirated.
So maybe you are all right or maybe no-one is right... or perhaps it was pronounced Yehoo-wahwah-booga-booga at some point in history...
Hi Dorayakii
You've got me cracking up laughing. This was really the point of my post. I can just imagine singing
"We're Yehoo-wahwah-booga-booga's witnesses ...".
Cheers
Dan
http://www.rzim.org/publications/jttran.php?seqid=52 .
"what cannot be doubted is that many new testament critics have approached the gospels with an utterly unjustified skepticism--a skepticism that wouldn't be considered justified in any other branch of ancient history.
new testament scholar r. t. france declares that "at the level of their literary and historical character we have good reason to treat the gospels as a source of information on the life and teachings of jesus, and thus on the historical origins of christianity.
There are some very interesting links between Judeo-Christian and Islamic traditions about Jesus (but that's another topic I guess).
This is something which is very relevant in today's world.
The concept of virgin birth due to divine intervention into the womb of Mary is really quite an abhorent speculation. This is another of those definitive issues which persuaded me that the Bible is a man made myth. While I am still inclined to think that Jesus did exist, and was a man, and a good man, I have no intrinsic faith in the words ascribed to him, other than that they stand or fall on their own merits.
JW's believe that Jesus is divine. The WTBTS believes that Jesus is not God, but that God implanted his seed in Mary's womb, literally.
As for the gospel stories about his birth and death, these are in terms of Christianity given far more importance than the teachings ascribed to him - such as love thy enemies, turn the other cheek, etc which are routinely ignored.
http://www.rzim.org/publications/jttran.php?seqid=52 .
"what cannot be doubted is that many new testament critics have approached the gospels with an utterly unjustified skepticism--a skepticism that wouldn't be considered justified in any other branch of ancient history.
new testament scholar r. t. france declares that "at the level of their literary and historical character we have good reason to treat the gospels as a source of information on the life and teachings of jesus, and thus on the historical origins of christianity.
Shining One If the Bible contains no error then why does the book of Mark have alternative endings?
both the catholic and jehovah's witness anthropomorphisize yhwh, but in reality the word should be pronounced as yawa - or ya'wa'.. in ancient sanskrit, a short "a" is the default vowel.
this is not limited to sanskrit but is a universal and generic default vowel and the most common vowel sound in most languages.
the "h" simply means that the short vowel "a" is forcefully aspirated.
This makes at least a three-syllable form such as Yehowah almost impossible, and Yahweh, otoh, ;quite a plausible one.
Hi Nark
A very good book in this regard is "IS IT GOD'S WORD" by Joseph Wheless (published 1926)
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_wheless/is_it_gods_word/
According to this author YHWH is more correctly pronounced Yaho - though I accept that your reasoning may have some validity notwithstanding that language can easily change over a thousand years especially when it is translated into another language.
According to Wheless - god is referred to as YY in Gen ii:4. This is of course translated as Jehovah in the New World Translation which is clearly wrong.
(P.S. unfortunately Wheless did subscribe to the theory current among white Australians and Americans that the so-called "aryan race" was the noble race. I mention this because Wheless is so bold as to state that "this my book speaks truly" but of course in regards to "the aryan race" his book speaks falsely - there is no such thing as an aryan race. Apart from this unfortunate lapse his book does ring true to me.
