Posts by lovelylil

108

Does the Rainbow Covenant Disprove the Flood?

by Severus in

the story goes that god provided the rainbow as a symbol of his promise to never again destroy the world by flood.. noah and his family saw the rainbow after they left the ark.

after the waters had receeded.

after it had stopped raining for months.... yet a rainbow is simply sunlight spread out into its spectrum of colors and diverted to the eye of the observer by water droplets.

lovelylil

Startingover,

I did not mean it the way you are taking it. Please read the pm I just sent you.

108

Does the Rainbow Covenant Disprove the Flood?

by Severus in

the story goes that god provided the rainbow as a symbol of his promise to never again destroy the world by flood.. noah and his family saw the rainbow after they left the ark.

after the waters had receeded.

after it had stopped raining for months.... yet a rainbow is simply sunlight spread out into its spectrum of colors and diverted to the eye of the observer by water droplets.

It is impossible for me to tell you why God chose a flood instead of a virus or some other means of wiping out man. I agree it seems a little unfair as all the land animals also perished. God knew this and that is why he had Noah bring representatives of each kind of animal onto the ark - to mate and fill the earth with land animals again.

Peacefulpete:

Thanks for the information about whitcomb. I need to find out more about his beliefs before I spend money on his book. I am not a new earth believer and I cannot see how he can believe in a global flood and the new earth theory at the same time. This is why;

There is no way that every species of land animal on the earth today could have had ancestors of each one on the ark. To hold all this animal life, the ark would have had to have been at least 100 times the size it way, maybe larger. The bible says two of each kind were brought onto the ark. That would mean, two birds, two wild cats, etc. From these animals we today have sometimes hundreds of species within each kind. This would be impossible if the flood were only a few thousand years ago. The animals would not have had time to evolve (thats right I said it) into all the species we have today. There are so many different species of just bugs that Scientists have not been able to catalog all them yet. And yet, some will say that Noah had all these on the ark with him? This is impossible.

I personally believe the flood story although recorded by the Jews a few thousand years ago, is actually an event that happend much longer ago in history than that. It would of had to have been in order for the animals to not only procreate, but develop (evolve) into all the variety of species we have today.

So, therefore, I cannot see how you can reconcile these two beliefs. If you believe in a global flood, you have to believe that it happend in the distant past. And thus cannot be a new earth enthusiast. To believe otherwise would go against too much scientific evidence to the contrary. There are even now new species developing. By the way this proves there are forms of evolution also. I believe God planned it that way. For animals and humans to survive, we have to evolve and adapt to our environment over time and I believe the ability to do this was put into our genes by our Creator. The universe is also still expanding so apparently God is not done with much of his creation.

I do know of some Witnesses when I was in the borg. that literally believed the earth was flooded a few thousand years ago and not only that they would say every animal in the world today was on that ark. Even my kids did not believe that one!

Anyway, thanks again, Lilly

14

Fact Check on Study Books, Please

by JW_Researcher in

could someone please verify the following are the books jws were encouraged to use for new "bible studies"?

i understand that there might have been some deviation (for example if a study couldn't read), but by and large, these were the first books.

i may be missing one?

lovelylil

The Live Forever book was replaced in 1995 by the Knowlege that leads to everlasting life book. Which was replaced in 2005 with the new book you have mentioned.

38

One Watchtower/Catholic comparison...

by Confession in

don't know how many of you have read m. james penton's "apocalypse delayed: the story of jehovah's witnesses.

" honestly it's not what i'd call an "easy read," but it does contain very well researched information.

i enjoyed his recognition of a similarity between the wts and catholicism.

lovelylil

Hi Jeff,

you make a good point about the WT being much more authoritarian then the Witnesses. That is true as I had a lot more freedoms when I was a Catholic then as a JW. Also, when I decided to leave the Catholic church - I just left. No one tried to kick me out, call me apostate or bring me before a judicial commitee.

I understand too that the NT we have today was put together to include books the Catholic Church approved of but I do not believe they have any more authority over God's people - The Church, which are the individual members in the body of Christ, than any other church has. Although they claim they can interpret the truth better as the Pope is the Vicar of Christ - this is a self appointed position only. I know the Catholic church also says it is directly descended from the Apostle Peter but without going into too much detail in this thread, that belief is based on a misunderstanding of scripture. Peter was not placed above any other Apostles by Christ. I know about this teaching as I refutted it prior to leaving the Catholic church.

That being said, I consider Catholics my brothers and sisters in the faith as they, like I , have accepted Jesus as their personal savior. And I respect their beliefs and their right to believe what their own conscience dictates to them. But I draw the line when they try to tell me that I am not accepted into Christ's body unless I am in touch with the Catholic Church. As a Catholic I am sure you can verify that this is the belief, although some of my Catholic nieghbors are a little more balanced in this view.

Jesus did not start any organized religion while he was on earth. In fact he was totally anti-established religion. He started the Christians faith only. And since I have been part of many organized churches over my lifetime I can tell you that every single one of them claim they are the only ones descended from Christ and the Apostles. Or that their church organization is the one that more closely matches the one in the Apostle's time. The only thing they can really say is their faith (the Christian faith) came from them, not the church itself. The churches as an organizational structure were not started until many years after the death of all the Apostles. There was absolutely no organization back then that resembled the JW org. or the Catholic Org. we have today, nor any other religous structure. Both of these groups and all the others, have evolved very much over time. Christians were united by holy spirit in the Apostle's day and not church afilliation. This is the same today in our time. I say this with all due respect to you. That is why these two orgs. are very similar in nature claiming sole authority over Christ's people.

When all is said and done, it will be up to Christ upon his arrival to judge who are really his disciples and this judging will have nothing to do with our church affilliation. But if you need that type of organiztion and enjoy the structure, there is certainly nothing wrong with that. Many Christians though have left such organizations are wish to remain free in Christ, awaiting our savior only to judge us, not any man made religion, doctrines or creeds. We recognize the Church as what it truthfully is - The people themselves in the body of Christ.

108

Does the Rainbow Covenant Disprove the Flood?

by Severus in

the story goes that god provided the rainbow as a symbol of his promise to never again destroy the world by flood.. noah and his family saw the rainbow after they left the ark.

after the waters had receeded.

after it had stopped raining for months.... yet a rainbow is simply sunlight spread out into its spectrum of colors and diverted to the eye of the observer by water droplets.

lovelylil

I checked Amazon, they had a brand new one for a good price. Also there is a look inside feature for this book and the one above that is pro-flood. Peacefulpete, the book you suggested looks interesting and is easy for a beginner into this topic to understand. I put it on my list and will order it within the next few weeks. Right now I am reading two books by Greg Albrecht - a Pastor formally from the World Wide Church of God. One is about the book of Revelation and the other is called "Bad News Religion". Greg is against organized religion, as I am too. Both great books, they stress God's grace over works. Thank you again, this was a good choice in a book for me. Have a good evening!

108

Does the Rainbow Covenant Disprove the Flood?

by Severus in

the story goes that god provided the rainbow as a symbol of his promise to never again destroy the world by flood.. noah and his family saw the rainbow after they left the ark.

after the waters had receeded.

after it had stopped raining for months.... yet a rainbow is simply sunlight spread out into its spectrum of colors and diverted to the eye of the observer by water droplets.

lovelylil

Thanks Peacefulpete,

I have an account with Amazon and I am going to add that book to my wishlist. I usually build up my list then order about once a month as I am an avid reader. While I am there, someone suggested a book with information pro-flood.(The Genesis Flood: the biblical record and its scientific implications by John C. Whitcomb) I think I will read both of them. The thing I appreciate the most since leaving the WT is that I have the freedom to research whatever topic I want and have no fear of displeasing God for doing it. Even the bible says we should prove all things to ourselves. Thats why I like topics like this thread where information can be shared by both sides of the issue. Ultimately though, we have to decide what we personally will accept as true. Thanks again.

55

WHAT WAS YOUR FAVOURITE/WORST STUDY BOOK?

by badboy in

jw
friends

which ones did you hate and which ones did you like out of the study books?

lovelylil

Penquin,

thanks for your response. I understand what you are saying. I think this is a topic I have strong feelings with because I was molested as a child. I for one have always talked opening with my kids about sex and what is/is not appropriate for people to do to them. And I taught them from day one that it is o.k. to say no to an adult. And that an adult should always respect their private areas.

I was furious that the WT would put this information into a book but yet did not deal with the pedophile issue properly. I was in a hall where a pedophile was hid. I was furious when I found out my son who was 7 at the time was using the restroom along side this man who had been jailed at least three times for rape and sodomy of young boys. One unsuspecting family even invited this man into their home for the evening and they had a young child also. This man was told by the elders not to go to the friends home if they have kids, but no one was keeping watch over him to make sure he did not do this. Since the elders did not warn anyone because they were afraid others outside the hall would find out , the kids in the hall were in real danger. Not long after I left the hall, during a convention, this man tried to attack a young boy in the restroom. I found out also later that this man admitted many times to the elders that he still had "wrong desires" towards children. If the WT dealt properly with these types of issues and had the parents input about the sexual material they put in their publications, I would have more respect for them.

I think the fact that you approached the parents first showed that you had the proper respect for their authority and you recognized that only they would know if their children were ready for that type of material.

I think one of the underlying issues I have with the WT is that they are underhanded and sneaky about things and also they undermine the parents authority over their own children by getting involved in family issues they have no business to be involved in.

I hope I did not mean to seem like I was angry towards you, but this is a sore spot for me. I opologize if I came on strong. Thanks again for your response, have a great evening, Lilly

108

Does the Rainbow Covenant Disprove the Flood?

by Severus in

the story goes that god provided the rainbow as a symbol of his promise to never again destroy the world by flood.. noah and his family saw the rainbow after they left the ark.

after the waters had receeded.

after it had stopped raining for months.... yet a rainbow is simply sunlight spread out into its spectrum of colors and diverted to the eye of the observer by water droplets.

lovelylil

startingover,

I agree with you, it is hard to tell when someone is kidding or not. I am sorry if I misunderstood. Whether God does ever speak to you or not, you are still a good person and have value no matter what your personal beliefs are. That is the one thing I try to bring out no matter what the topic is. Our beliefs are personal and each one must wiegh the evidence and decide for himself. If God does not call you at this time to follow him, it does not mean you were not worthy in some way, it just means he has something different planned for you, that is all. If more of my fellow Christians would understand this, they would not be judgemental of unbelievers either. My belief is that this time period in human history is for the calling out of Christians for a particular duty in the future - which interestingly enough will be to serve and care for non-believers. But that is best left for another thread at another time. I wish you peace in your life, Lilly

19

Awake only published once a month but still pitifully poor!

by eyeslice in

jw
friends

looking through the latest copy of the awake that i got from my wife who has just got back from the meeting.

what strikes me is that although the awake is now only published monthly it is still the same old tired format.

'watching the world' still has the same pathetic cartoons, and the style and tone of the articles are just the same.

lovelylil

I agree, I have read high school newspapers with more debth than this mag. It seems to be geared toward young teens although my daughter who is 13, always felt the writing was too boring and infantile even for her age group.

55

WHAT WAS YOUR FAVOURITE/WORST STUDY BOOK?

by badboy in

jw
friends

which ones did you hate and which ones did you like out of the study books?

lovelylil

penguin,

I appreciate your comment and agree that most parents do not talk with their kids about sex. But that book the WT put out is aimed at the under 10 year old and while you should talk about sex with them to protect them from pedophiles, you should gear it for their age group. I did not think my kids needed to know what a vulva was. Of course they knew penis and vagina but vulva? This is no reason that chapter had to be worded like that.

Also, the it is absolutely none of the WT's business whether or not parents talk to their kids about sex and child abuse. They have no right to do this at all. I believe all parents should but that is a personal choice. The problem with the WT is they think they can control everyone in all aspects of their life. And there is another, real reason they put that chapter in their book and it has nothing to do with them caring for our kids.This information was in there, not because the WT cares one hoot about the children in the Tower, if they did they would not hide pedophiles to begin with, but rather it is there to help cover their own arses in case someones sues because their child was molested. And they say they were not warned of pedophiles in the org. The WT can turn around and say "we do give warnings to parents to protect their children, see here in this book made just for the kids.........". Then they can use this example on how concerned they are so they tried to make sure the kids had proper training. This is simply a smokescreen, it means nothing, they do not care.

If I was the parent of the kids you studied that book with - I would have thrown you out on your ear! My kids have a father and a mother, we are the ones to train our kids in this area, not two strangers who have no history or relationship to our kids. This would make my kids very uncompfortable to begin with. I am glad you asked the mother but the WT did not ask for my permission nor the permission of any other parents who accepted this book. They just put the information in there! At my kids school for sex ed (they are now 11 and 13) I have to give my permission in order for the school to teach my kids their program.

If you see nothing wrong with this, ask yourself this question, would you invite the mailman in to give a sex talk to your young child? Well, he knows your child just as well as the two strangers in nice suits or dresses for that matter.

Also, you are entitled to your opinion but the WT claims they are the only religion preaching the gospel of Jesus and the medium they use are their printed publications. I am sorry but information about a child's penis and vulva have what to do with the gospel?

Imagine if anyone from the Mormon church came to your door with that type of information for your children (if you have any) - would you not think they were off their rocker? I would, and I did when I saw it in the WT book. It is totally inapproprate for people who are strangers to talk about delicate issues with other peoples kids.

Sorry if this sounds a bit strong. My hubby had the same reaction you did. Maybe I am wrong but as a woman and a mother, this chapter just totally got mother's instinct screaming: This is totally wrong!

Does anyone else out there feel the way I do?