Posts by Cold Steel

28

Satanic Temple’s Seven Tenets - Makes 10 Commandments Sound Facile

by cofty in

the so-called 10 commandments are a post-biblical construct.... there is an elohist list at exodus 20 and a yahwist one at exodus 34 that contains such gems as "you shall not cook a kid in its mother’s milk.".

any intelligent adult could create a more useful list of ethical precepts before the end of a coffee break.. it is interesting to compare the satanic temple's seven tenets.

i think you might agree that it makes yahweh's rules look like they were written by a bronze age power-hungry, misogynistic priest.

Cold Steel

The Ma'atian ethics, so-called, are seen by many historians as a foundation of societal longevity. I have a beautiful painted Egyptian statute of Ma'at on my bookshelf and the various codes attributed to her worship not only promoted civility, but justice. If followed, those codes not only helped provide for the common defense, but helped ensure domestic tranquility. These are traits put into the hearts of men by God and are recognized as being honorable and virtuous attributes far removed from instinct. Cats all over the world lick themselves the same way without being taught, but instinct can't explain ingrained moral behavior.

Slavery. NOT servitude of one Israelite to another but the ownership of a man or woman who was a non-Israelite. They could be beaten and passed on as chattel to children.Your god does not get that it is dehumanising for one human to own another human.

What convinces you that slavery is wrong? If there's no God to declare it wrong, then there's no immorality involved at all. Yet it is wrong under most circumstances. But under the Mosaic Law, it was permitted, albeit with a host of restrictions designed to preserve human dignity. Your god, Cofty, has no virtues or vices. There is, in your mind, no goodness in him, nor evil, because (as you said) he doesn't exist. Yet you claim to be arbiter enough to judge Yahweh for allowing the servitude of men one to another. Again, how do you know forced servitude is evil if there is no God? Who told you it's evil? ("Who told thee thou wast naked?") Who put it into your mind? Were you born knowing it? How do you know torturing animals is wrong? Or anything else?

By the way most of the OT law was plagiarised from the code of Hammurabi.

It is true that both appear to have a common source, but no one knows who devised the code or from whence it was derived. Since God gave the law to Moses, I suspect it was given before. Of course, if there is no God, then some ancient probably wrote it and some sneaky Hebrew scribe stole it and attributed it to the Hebrew God. But even then no one knows for sure. Stuff that old is mostly conjecture. It's just like the story of the ancient flood. Just because a version is the oldest known does not mean it's the original. The flood is a tradition had among the Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Jews, Mayans, Olmecs, Aztecs, Asians, North American natives and many other peoples. The oldest we have extant is the Babylonian. But that doesn't mean it originated with them. So my answer to you is, please stop spouting off stuff you read on your little atheistic bull boards and start proving your points.

Oh, and one last thing. How do you know there's no Satan? 😈

28

Satanic Temple’s Seven Tenets - Makes 10 Commandments Sound Facile

by cofty in

the so-called 10 commandments are a post-biblical construct.... there is an elohist list at exodus 20 and a yahwist one at exodus 34 that contains such gems as "you shall not cook a kid in its mother’s milk.".

any intelligent adult could create a more useful list of ethical precepts before the end of a coffee break.. it is interesting to compare the satanic temple's seven tenets.

i think you might agree that it makes yahweh's rules look like they were written by a bronze age power-hungry, misogynistic priest.

Cold Steel

There is an Elohist list at Exodus 20 and a Yahwist one at Exodus 34 that contains such gems as "You shall not cook a kid in its mother’s milk." Any intelligent adult could create a more useful list of ethical precepts before the end of a coffee break.

Yes, if not cooking a kid in its mother's milk was the pinnacle of the Mosaic Law. But it's not. In fact, it's a very moralistic code that's rich in ethics, compassion and morality. Militant atheists revel in the same things that Satan does, and that's accusation. They stand collectively as an adversary and accuser of God. The mother's milk is life to her young. That the Lord would see the horrific ramifications of this and forbid it recognizes the sacrifice of life in both the mother and the kid.

The law also forbade the netting of all of one's fig trees to protect them from hungry birds. You could net some, but you had to leave a portion of them unnetted so as to feed the birds. There were similar provisions for animals and the ethical, compassionate use and treatment of beasts. Crops could not be fenced, but had to be open to allow the hungry to eat. The people also were taught not to gather a farmer's food for their own profit, and there were ethical treatments and protections for both beasts of burden and bonded servants. I lack the time and space to tutor you on these things, but the laws of God to the ancients have never been equaled or excelled by mortal law. But to accuse, you, like the great accuser of God, must stoop to dishonest levels to oppose Him. Why not list what you feel are the immoral codes of God's law? Where was He petty, vindictive, unfair?

It is interesting to compare The Satanic Temple's Seven Tenets. I think you might agree that it makes Yahweh's rules look like they were written by a Bronze Age power-hungry, misogynistic priest.

Yes, and where do you find Satan advocating those seven tenents? What about those he endorsed anciently, such as to murder to get power and gain, torture animals, human sacrifice, including the throwing of living infants into the fires, and the decadent immoral practices of sacral prostitution, bestiality and other immoral practices forbidden by God. There were plenty of misogynistic priests anciently, but they were primarily the priests in the employ of the Adversary, not God. You also are wholly ignorant of the levels of wickedness in pagan society or, as we've seen, in God's law, yet you pretend to sit in judgment of His ethics. Yet where would any of us ever have conceived of ethics, or evils, were it not for God, who is the author of those ethics? Off not for Him, they would not exist.

24

GB Members: What's the Story?

by Cold Steel in

over the past few decades i've met many individual jws, but i've always been curious about the gb members themselves and about service at bethel.

first, do gb members fraternize with regular rank and file members or do they only sell out each other?

when i was a methodist, it didn't take me long to figure out that our minister and his wife were frequently invited to dinner, but i never heard of him actually inviting members to his house for dinner.

Cold Steel

Some interesting comments here, but I'm surprised they're so impersonal. If a person is working at Bethel and are seeing these GB members all the time or are hearing stories about them, I'd think they would be either very positive or very negative. I'd never heard of Ray Franz being DF'ed for merely having a meal with another DF'ed member (I'd heard he had a friendship with someone, but wasn't he first warned before he was canned?).

Is there a senior member of the GB who sits above the rest -- like the apostle Peter? Or is it all up to a vote?

What would be the effect, hypothetically speaking, if one of the more well known GB members announced that he'd had a vision or visitation from On High? Would he tend to be believed our would he be dismissed?

I'd really like to know how these guys see themselves. Are they confident in their callings? Do they enthusiastically buy into their own story? Do they see the WTBTS as God's crowning work in the last days and view themselves as part of it? And do the people at Bethel feel honored to be working shoulder-to-shoulder with the Lord's specially anointed, or is their attitude more like "Yeah, right!"

8

New Converts: When Does It Start?

by Cold Steel in

johnny normal is watching television one day when he hears a knock at the door.

answering it he sees two jehovah's witnesses clutching bibles; and one a brief case.

over the next few months things are going well.

Cold Steel

Johnny Normal is watching television one day when he hears a knock at the door. Answering it he sees two Jehovah's Witnesses clutching bibles; and one a brief case. Over the next few months things are going well. He's had a number of bible studies and is buying into the organization. At 23 years old he's in a good school studying astrophysics. My question is, when does the Society begin to interfere in his life and future plans?

I've heard that it's not unusual for the elders and even general members to offer...umm...unsolicited advice on wholly temporal matters. And that seeking higher education is frowned upon by the leadership of the Society.

So when is Johnny Normal ready for some counseling? And why do regular JWs feel they can interfere with trivial matters that are none of their business?

Any examples anyone can share?

24

GB Members: What's the Story?

by Cold Steel in

over the past few decades i've met many individual jws, but i've always been curious about the gb members themselves and about service at bethel.

first, do gb members fraternize with regular rank and file members or do they only sell out each other?

when i was a methodist, it didn't take me long to figure out that our minister and his wife were frequently invited to dinner, but i never heard of him actually inviting members to his house for dinner.

Cold Steel

Over the past few decades I've met many individual JWs, but I've always been curious about the GB members themselves and about service at Bethel. First, do GB members fraternize with regular rank and file members or do they only sell out each other? When I was a Methodist, it didn't take me long to figure out that our minister and his wife were frequently invited to dinner, but I never heard of him actually inviting members to his house for dinner. Then I noticed the same thing at my wife's church. Her priest and his wife never paid for a meal when going to a church dinner or lunch at local restaurants. So what of the VIPs in the society? When they visit, do people generally invite them for meals?

Also, do they tend to be generally humble or do they come across as intimidating? Are some especially beloved or respected? Are any despised? And at Bethel, do they interact well with the staff or are they not to be bothered?

I'm just curious because the only thing I hear about them is as a body. If I were a member who has had several interactions with a GB member, would I be out of line calling him and asking him to lunch? Are there any boundaries or are they just regular guys? (I can understand if you're an employee at Bethel that this might not be inappropriate, but if you're not, I wouldn't see any impropriety.)

18

5th Columb : We need a signal to identify each other

by Deltawave in

jw
friends

i have been thinking, it is a lonely place in the real world knowing ttatt but if we have a phrase we can unite, support and help each other.

the question we will ask is:.

what's your favorite bible verse?

Cold Steel

Oh yeah. Just wait until you're called up before the elders.

"What's the charge, brother?"

"I heard him distinctly say, 'What's your favorite bible verse?'"

"I also heard him say it."

"Me, too."

47

Did Jesus actually start a church to himself?

by TTWSYF in

with some 30,000 different christian denominations, how would one know which one was for real?

some folks think jesus did start a church, others think no.

Cold Steel

The word for "church" is a term meaning "called out." And though Jesus respected the authority of the temple priests, there simply isn't enough recorded information to draw the conclusions that Prof. Vermes draws. What, for example, were Jesus' final instructions to the Twelve during his 40-day ministry? (Acts 1:1-2) No one knows. We have the Acts of the Apostles, some of the epistles. We see Peter standing in judgment and condemning two church members, Ananias and Sapphira; so he obviously had authority. (See Acts 5) Otherwise, why weren't the Jewish leaders the ones standing in judgment over them?

Jesus also announced that he was giving Peter the keys of the kingdom, indicating that he had them. Jesus is the one who gave Moses the law, so he was not subject to the Jewish leaders. He also appointed the apostles as judges over the Twelve Tribes. How, then, can the good professor argue that Jesus intended to incorporate his movement into Judaism? The way he appears to argue is that Jesus had expectations that were based in error, and many Christians are not willing to concede that. Also, there's absolutely no evidence that the apostles expected God to restore Israel in their day. Instead, they fully knew that the Romans would scatter Israel to the four corners of the earth and burn the temple because Jesus prophesied it.

There are traditions about what Jesus taught during the 40 days, but if we just go by what's in the New Testament, we know nothing about the 40 days. As two current scholars note:

Luke states that during the 40-day ministry the Savior spoke "of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God," but there are only vague hints in other New Testament writings as to the nature and content of these teachings.

754

Theists, why does God allow suffering..

by The Quiet One in

..specifically, the suffering of animals.

you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.

i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.

Cold Steel

Defender: Your claim has no evidence whatsoever to support it.

Christians have varying views on this topic. As I see it, Paul put it plainly when he said, "For in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." (I Corinthians 15:22)

Many take this "all" to be humans only, but since animals inherited death through Adam, I believe they will inherit life through the atonement. Jehovah's Witnesses may not buy into that line of thinking, but there's nothing in the Bible that definitively states whether animals have spirits. I think one could, through observation, conclude that if man has a spirit, then animals also have spirits.

Death comes to all, men and animals, and animals fulfill the measure of their creation. Men and animals also are intelligent, and in my theology intelligence and matter can change, but they can't be created. Being intelligent, the spirits of all men and animals, plus insects, fish and other living things all existed as spirits in premortality. They now exist as part of man's exile and will rise with him in the resurrection.

There also are numerous references to animals in the accounts of those who had near death experiences. One of the most credible (to me) described the spirit world as rich in color, vibrancy and peace. He wrote:

The towering peaks boasted splendid jagged crags and massive cliffs. A gorgeous waterfall descended from thousands of feet on high to a quiet pool below. The pool rested in a serene meadow flanked by green foliage, which progressed into a variety of colors in the bushes and trees. A mighty golden eagle soared above us. The peace was so enthralling that no one would ever want to leave.
As I looked upon the beauty, my eyes were suddenly caught by a mighty lion breaking through the bushes into the meadow. He looked directly at me. My immediate reaction was one of fear and I tensed. I looked at [my guide]. He chuckled, then turned to look at the lion. The lion began to walk right towards me until he stood exactly by my left side.
Suddenly, it was as if I heard the lion’s spirit communicating to me, in my mind. “It’s all right. Don’t be afraid. All God’s creations are safe in this kingdom.”
I felt a love being radiated from this mighty beast. Randy turned to me and said, “Go ahead. Pet him.”
The animal leaned its head to the back of my hand and rubbed its mane against it. I slowly raised my hand and began to stroke his long coarse hair. It was interesting to me that, although we were both spirits, I could still feel the hair. ... Suddenly I looked up and saw a mother deer walking across the meadow not more than twenty feet behind the lion. She had a fawn at her side. They calmly looked at the lion; the lion looked at them. There was nothing but peace between them.... I was impressed by the instant feeling of love I felt for all animal life. I knew of a certainty that God loves these creatures. It is important that we show respect for them. As another lesson had been deeply implanted in my mind, we took our leave and continued down the stone pathway stretching into the distance. (The Message, by Lance Richardson)

Of course this is evidence of nothing, but these accounts frequently refer to animals and their increased, or enhanced, intelligence in the spirit world.

What is indisputable, however, is that when you look at the body of a deceased animal, it's clear that something is missing. Call it the spirit or the animating spark, a body lacks it at death and even children can readily see that a dead body in many ways appears artificial. Thus, it depends on one's views regarding the scope of the atonement. Bottom line is that the Bible doesn't answer the question of whether animals have spirits, so the JWs can only guess. I do find it significant, however, that the Lord uses animals so much in his prophetic visions. Certainly if we can love animals, and they us, and if they are noble enough to sacrifice their own lives for us, I'd say they should qualify for a resurrection.

"Some people believe this passage teaches that during the three days his body was in the tomb, Jesus went into the spirit-world of the imprisoned lost. At that time, according to this theory, the Lord preached the gospel to those who died lost during the time of Noah’s flood." (See I Peter 3:18-20)

You're right. This doesn't refer to animals. Animals can't sin and they certainly don't need preaching to. Also, most Christians regard the resurrection as the reuniting of the body and the spirit. Man goes to the spirit world to await the resurrection. The early church father, Origen, in trying to reconstruct the teaching of the apostles, wrote, "After death, I think the saints go to Paradise, a place of learning or school of the spirits, in which everything they did on Earth will be made clear to them." He said in that environment we progress through definite steps or degrees. This also corresponds to many near death experiences, where people learn and progress through "life reviews." Our resurrection will be like Christ's resurrection. It will be a physical resurrection. "For a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me have."

47

Did Jesus actually start a church to himself?

by TTWSYF in

with some 30,000 different christian denominations, how would one know which one was for real?

some folks think jesus did start a church, others think no.

Cold Steel

Jesus told Peter, "upon this rock I will build my church." The Catholics believe the rock was Peter; however, in context, the rock of Israel was Christ. Jesus had also queried Peter as to his own identity, and Peter had answered under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, "Thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living God." To which the Lord replied, "Flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee, but my Father which is in Heaven." It was then that the Lord said, "upon this rock" he would build his church, "and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it."

The "it" here is clearly "the church." The sure knowledge Peter received was revelation from God. It's entirely likely that the church also is based upon the "rock" of revelation -- or the spiritual knowledge that comes, not through the knowledge of man but by the witness of God. Jesus additionally said, "and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it." This is frequently cited by the Catholics and others to show that the church would "prevail" through the ages and would never cease. But John talks about the church being led into the wilderness for 1260 days (years), and the scripture says it's not the church that's the subject, but the "gates of hell" that would not prevail against the church. In other words, the church is assaulting the gates of Hades, or death. These gates would resist, but they would not prevail against the church (see Matthew 16:18). The very next verse speaks of the keys of authority Peter would need.

"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." These keys ensure the proper administration of the church so that its ordinances would apply on Heaven and on Earth.

So as I see it, if Jesus has a church, it will be like his ancient church. It will have his name, be guided by him and have his authority. It also will be built like the ancient church, with apostles, prophets, bishops, elders, priests, deacons and other offices. And it will be guided by revelation and have an open canon of scripture, just as the ancient church.

15

Did you know that Satan bump nesties with Eve.

by James Mixon in

some christians explanation for evil in the world.

i came across this "serpent seed".. it claims that cain was the offspring of eve and the talking serpent (sorry i'm lmao while.

writing this) that christians much later identified as satan.

Cold Steel

And where would these "Christians" come up with such a doctrine? I've never heard it before. Is it a modern concept or something that was found in an ancient pseudipigraphal writing? There are loads of weird doctrines and teachings out there that fall in the heresy category. It probably was designed to address the issue of how God can create evil.