Posts by Cold Steel

13

Jehovah`s Witnesses an Old Testament Religion

by smiddy in

jehovah`s witnesses claim to be a christian religion , however looking at their history , publications ,such as the watchtower and awake mags., their conventions ,international ,regional ,local ,etc.their books pamphlets ,brochures ,etc.etc.

you are hard pressed to find references to the new testament and references to jesus and his ministry .. they seem to be more focused on the old testament , and the god of the old testament.jehovah.

even in their dramas at conventions , international and local events they are pre-occupied with old testament accounts and experiences , and not christian experiences , examples or ,lives to emulate .. they claim to be a christian religion and very seldom do they highlight the name of jesus , or his teachings , they are fixed on the old testament name of jehovah , and what he did in the old testament.

Cold Steel

I've never heard a theology graduate complain about God being a bloodthirsty, genocidal baby killing desert deity. Why? Because they're generally not copying and pasting from atheistic websites.

Theological commentator Jonathan Sherwin points out that since there's no way to scientifically attack God, that atheists resort to the same old attacks on God's character:

Leaving behind the intellectual front, those with a particular disdain for Christianity retreated only to launch an offensive on the moral character of God. Instead of talking about such things as beginnings and designers and all the rest of it, now perhaps some of the thrust is towards what sort of a God is there.
Richard Dawkins, the best-selling author known for his articulate attacks on religion – and Christianity in particular – takes special objection to the character of God found in the Old Testament. Dawkins tells us that “[the] God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction”, before unleashing a torrent of nasty character attributes upon God. Whilst leaving aside claims of the Bible as “fiction” for a later article, the accusation of unpleasantness should be taken very seriously.
Let us be quite clear here, the Bible has some very difficult passages to digest. Many of these are found in the Old Testament and centre on the exploits of Joshua in his handling of the Canaanites.
Cries of ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ and ‘Genocide’ ring out from the towers of atheism. How on earth could you love that same God? How on earth could you say that same God is loving? After all, we rightly condemn the atrocities committed at the hands of the Nazis upon the Jews, or of blood spilled in Rwanda in 1994, so how can the God of the Old Testament not be held to the same standard?
Some of the problematic parts can be found in the book of Joshua. In one such place it is said that Joshua “struck all the land” and “left no survivor.” He is said to have “utterly destroyed all who breathed”. Heavy words. Now to set the scene briefly, we must understand something about Canaanite culture. It was bloodthirsty. Think of a scene from the film 300, but worse. Child sacrifice? Absolutely, it was built in to the heart of the culture. Bestiality? Part of the norm. If we today, part of a nice, civilised, anaesthetised, culture were to be transported back to their day we would most likely break down under sensory overload at the horrors that confronted us.
But surely, you might say, there could be a better way to deal with this than killing everyone. After all, isn’t God supposed to merciful? Well, we read earlier in Genesis that God was patient. In fact, God waited 1,430 years before acting. We also read that this sort of thing wasn’t just a judgement on one people group, and indeed, when the Israelites, God’s own people, got mixed up in some bad things their judgement was equally bad.

Although the Bible never says so, I personally believe that God destroyed Carthage during the Punic wars using the Romans. Although Rome wasn't a perfect society by a long shot, they had a good, solid form of government and they didn't practice human sacrifice. They were trade competitors with Carthage, but as far as they were concerned, it was nothing personal. But the Carthaginians were profligate in their religious practices with ritual prostitution and throwing their infants into the fires of Molech. Atheists, however, are more critical of God than those degenerate peoples he destroyed. And they do it not because they believe in God, but because they believe that if He did exist, His actions would disqualify Him for the job.

But the fallacy of such thinking is obvious. God's critics say if God did exist, He's a monster. But that's a classic non seqitur. Because if God does exist, He knows all things, has all power and knows the hearts of all men. They also ignore the obvious fact that if there is a God, then all men have spirits and continue on after death. If there is no God, then men and animals cease to exist at death and do not live on...in which case this entire debate is meaningless. Nothing has any meaning.

52

Is the WT’s Paradise Earth doctrine a delusion?

by deegee in

the wt’s teaching that humans will live forever on a paradise earth will necessitate that given that there will be no more death, then immortal humans will have to be relocated to other planets in order to prevent the earth from becoming overpopulated.. so how many habitable, earth-like planets are there?more and more habitable, earth-like planets would have to become available on a continuous, never-ending basis ad infinitum as mankind’s population grows given that there will be no more death.. the longevity/sustainability of life on these planets will be limited by the fact that the sun serving these planets will eventually die:https://shar.es/1cko6n.

http://www.space.com/22437-main-sequence-stars.html#sthash.ejbt1xrz.dpuf.

so immortal humans will have to keep moving from planet to planet.

Cold Steel

Happily, the JW's concept of Paradise is flawed. To the early Christians, Parardise was a place where the souls of the righteous await the resurrection. As Clement of Alexandria wrote, "After death, I think the saints go to Paradise, a place of learning or school of the spirits, where everything they did on Earth would be made clear to them." We cannot expect that men can be either saved or damned in ignorance, and many on Earth have died without having heard of Jesus or his gospel. So if they don't hear it here, they must hear it there, as did the thief on the cross.

Even the best of Christians must come to grips with their own lives; their faults, their successes, the good within themselves and the bad. This is reflected in countless near death experiences, where people undergo what's now popularly referred to as "life reviews." Those who have experienced them say it all happens very rapidly, yet they say it is extraordinary comprehensive and in places most unpleasant. Yet it's designed to purge the soul. The more wicked a person is, the more unpleasant the experience. Imagine, if you will, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Saddam and his sons, and many, many others having to constantly relive their mortal existences, witnessing to the last detail the effects of their lives upon others down to the last niggling detail. Of watching each of their victims from the time of their births to the time of their deaths. Of experiencing everything they experienced, feeling everything they felt. And all of this through the entirety of the Millennium!

This, I think, is the fire of Hell. But as Malachi said, it will be a refiner's fire. And though the suffering is intense, it burns away one's wickedness, or sins. When one emerges from it, one is a better person. Thus, King David cries unto the Lord, "for thou shalt not leave my soul in hell."

The JWs see the atonement as restoring man to what he was in Eden, only now everyone will dress for dinner. But that would be a nightmare. Man was created to be much more than that.

3

Old Nick

by Carol1111 in

a friend had some jw's knock at his door and satan was discussed.

my friend kept referring to satan as 'old nick'.

the jw's seemed rather upset by this.

Cold Steel

It annoys JW's if you do not seem to be going along with their view that the debbil is a real entity. They also get annoyed if you refer to their god as jehoober and them as jehubbadubbs.

I imagine it would. "Old Nick" is a colloquial and accepted term for many 19th and 20th century folks and the JWs may resent the tone of familiarity in the reference. They'll just have to get over it. As for the other terms, many Christians refer to the Old Testament God as JEHOVAH, or YHWH. And it would be considered bad form to refer to either as "jehoober" in mixed company. Some consider the terms as sacred.

9

Why don't we have dominion over the animals?

by Coded Logic in

a devout christian had his buttocks mauled by a lion after challenging the big cat to a duel in order to prove the “lord’s power over animals”.. alec ndiwane, who has been described as a “prophet” in african media, was on safari at the kruger national park in south africa when he confronted the pride.. determined to prove to fellow tourists that god would save him, ndiwane is said to have gone into a trance and started speaking in tongues before opening his car door and charging at the lions.. but the lions were quick off the mark and bit him viciously on the backside as he clambered into the vehicle.. a warden managed to scare the big cats off by firing a gun in the air.. “i do not know what came over me,” ndiwane told ghanaweb.. “i thought the lord wanted to use me to show his power over animals.

is it not we were given dominion over all creatures of the earth?” he added.. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6994224/devout-christian-has-buttocks-mauled-by-lions-after-challenging-big-cats-to-a-duel-to-prove-the-lords-power-over-animals.html?cmp=spklr-_-editorial-_-twitter-_-thesunnewspaper-_-20160311-_-news-_-394160343-_-imageandlink.

Cold Steel

My cat 🐱 also wins.

One minute he's fine, the next minute he goes apeshit and I know when to back off! Playing with a full grown cat can be intimidating at times. There's a very fine line between play and predator.

But the Christian did prove we have dominion over the beasts. He went into the pride and told those lions to kiss 💋 his ass, in the name of the Lord.

And one lion did!

27

I am losing

by NoMoreHustle in

i haven't posted anything for a bit, but wanted to express how i am losing this battle.

it has been over 3 years now since i woke up about watchtower.

the battle that i am talking about is the tug of war with my wife (i adore her immensely), watchtower is winning, she simply will not give in to my so-called negative thoughts about the religion that we are in.

Cold Steel

at the end of the day my wife's feelings & relationship are more important to me than anything else ❤

This pretty much says it all. But freeing one's self from the confines of any false belief doesn't require you having to choose between it and one's family. Nor does subversion work very well unless you can replace it with a better spiritual foundation because people need religion as a means of making sense of one's existence. Even atheists need to believe in something, even if it's nothing.

Were you both JWs before you were married or are you converts? If converts, what churches were you members of? Do you still consider yourself a Christian or has your awakening caused you to lose your faith in everything? Also, when you say you're having a tug of war with your wife, what type? How far do you go? When it comes to writing a check to Jehovah's earthly kingdom, is there tension? When it comes to money, dropping yours into the coffers of a false religion must be difficult.

When you two go to the KH together, if you're still going, do you ask "inappropriate" questions? Rock the boat in any way? Does she seem willing to talk about the things that bother you or does she clam up? And finally, has she gone to see the elders yet?

Sorry to hear you're going through this, but I'm happy to hear you're sticking with your family.

24

Please, tell me.

by andrewlya in

hi, i am a christian and i would like to know jehovas witness's belief in god and whether you believe jesus is god.

please, any statements back up with biblical verses,thank you and god bless, in jesus's name.. i am new on here, so please be patient with me :).

Cold Steel

Christianity is plagued with trying to balance the Trinity with the monotheism of the Jews. There's little in the New Testament to clear things up, either. The JWs are not believers in the Trinity; rather, they believe that Jesus was, in premortality, Michael the Archangel, which is purely conjecture. But in Acts and other Christian writings, there seems to be a definite line drawn between Jesus and God. Check out the stoning of Stephen in Acts 7:

55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
...
59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.

Any observer could deduce from just this one passage that Jesus and God were two different beings, which is how the JWs read it. So they say, well, if Jesus and God are two different beings, who's the next greatest being in Heaven? Michael the Archangel!

BTW, the above is only one example of differentiations between God and Jesus. Only in the writings of John is the relationship between the Father, Son and Man. JWs also don't believe that the Holy Spirit is an actual personage but, rather, the "active force" of God. In other words, when God commands, the active force is what carries out His will. JWs argue that they are the only Christians who believe in one God. They reason that if the Father is God, then Jesus can't be God, because God told Isaiah He is the only God, and there are no others. If there were others, He said, He would know about it. If I understand the Trinity correctly, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three manifestations of the same being, or entity.

JWs reject that out of hand.

46

Any weapons enthusiasts here?

by Wonderment in

i knew i had a couple of firearms around the house, and one in the car.

however, i didn't realize i had seven, yes, seven of them, when i proceeded to count them.

the reason for that is that i haven't gone to the shooting range in years.

Cold Steel

Heck, sometimes I forget where I even hid them.

I knew a former Arizona prosecutor who told me he had a weapon in every room of his house. I asked a mutual friend, "Don't you think that's a bit extreme?"

"Ordinarily, yes," my friend said, also a prosecutor, "but knowing some of the people he put away, it's not...for him.

Do any of you know of anyone with guns who have been "counseled" to lose them by the presiding elders?

I've been told guns are okay to use for hunting, but not for self defense. I have a friend who's a member of the Apostolic Church of God, and she is wholeheartedly for the Second Amendment. But, she's against using firearms for self defense, believing that God will protect her and her family. Generally, however, God requires that we do all that we can for ourselves before lending His assistance. Anciently, God met many prophets on mountain tops. This was, I think, symbolic of this principle.

My firearms instructor told me the story of an intruder who advanced on a woman who was armed but couldn't bring herself to shoot. But then the woman's 6-year old son came into the room. Smiling wickedly, the intruder stepped sideways to grab the child...and was greatly surprised when the lad's mother emptied the gun into him, killing him on the spot.

In the U.K., Tony Martin, a farmer, received a "life sentence" when he used a shotgun to shoot one of two intruders who had broken into his home and subsequently threatened Martin with a raised crowbar. But the farmer had neglected to turn in the shotgun in when the country outlawed them, and ended up in prison whilst the other intruder was lionized by the media, even though both had criminal records and several of Martin's neighbors had been brutally assaulted in the past. Still, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, "We can't have people taking the law into their own hands." Yeah, even if the guy was going to smack you in the head with a crowbar! In the U.K. there was outrage, but not enough to save him from a life sentence. The surviving intruder was turned into a hero whilst the victim was turned into a hateful vigilante. As one great 19th century religious leader said, a people who lose the Spirit of God lose the ability to act in their own self interest.

I think that's true.

46

Any weapons enthusiasts here?

by Wonderment in

i knew i had a couple of firearms around the house, and one in the car.

however, i didn't realize i had seven, yes, seven of them, when i proceeded to count them.

the reason for that is that i haven't gone to the shooting range in years.

Cold Steel

I understand that some JWs are deadset against guns for self defense. I don't know why that would be, except that the elders and even other WTS members somehow feel empowered to butt into the lives of other members on things like magazine subscriptions, framed pictures on walls, future educational plans, books on shelves, CDs, DVDs and even clothing. And guns are one of those things people get all worked up over one way or the other.

I believe more laws relating to background checks and firearm identification WILL dramatically reduce deaths and are necessary.

Not necessarily. First, do you really want to turn over your right to own guns to an anti-gun psychiatrist who may be treating you for mild depression or insomnia. Many shootings occur when some kid is hyped up on some of these new anti-depression drugs. As far as I know, there was little in the lives of most of these shooters that would have weeded them out. There's enough evidence pointing to these drugs to justify further study, but the fact remains: many people are on them and are doing fine with no desire to harm either animals or people. What would happen if the time came when potential gun owners had to have a psychiatric examination before they could purchase a gun of any type? What the gun-banners really want to do is enact registration, because before you can confiscate them you have to find out where they are (all the while promising that you'll NEVER come for them).

But what the heck...don't we register cars? Yes, but no one ever came for them. In fact, no country that has enacted registration has failed to later use it to go after the guns. Germany, the U.K., Canada, Australia -- and Hillary Clinton, in one of her first debates, said, 1) she didn't want to collect anyone's guns, and moments later, 2) she said she'd seriously consider the gun controls implemented by Canada and Australia (both of which registered guns, then used the registration forms to confiscate them).

46

Any weapons enthusiasts here?

by Wonderment in

i knew i had a couple of firearms around the house, and one in the car.

however, i didn't realize i had seven, yes, seven of them, when i proceeded to count them.

the reason for that is that i haven't gone to the shooting range in years.

Cold Steel

Living in the U.S. certainly has its benefits, doesn't it?

Just recently I came across a video of a hiker in Washington who found a mountain lion in his path. He only had a walking stick and some pepper spray, which isn't adequate in my view. I have a friend who killed a mountain lion when it dropped from a tree and rushed him. He was inspecting fence posts for his father-in-law in Utah when it happened, and he pulled his .357 and shot it. Because this wasn't normal behavior for a mountain lion, they sent the head to the Centers for Disease Control in Denver. The report came back positive for rabies. But at the time, my friend was heartbroken over having to kill such a beautiful animal.

Man is, alas, perhaps the only creature created by God with no natural defenses against the elements or other predators. We have no fur, our skin is easily ripped and torn, our feet almost always needs binding, we have no sharp teeth or claws, our muscle density is pathetic; we can't even outrun our most dangerous enemies. Of all animals, human young are the most vulnerable and they stay vulnerable for years. God gave us no natural defenses, so the American founders were serious when they said self defense was a right given us by God.

Rosie O'Donnell said in this day and age no one needs guns, but her security detail carries them. She thinks New York extends all the way westward until the suburbs of Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle are reached. She thinks that there's a cop on every corner between there and here and that we've reached the point where we as a society no longer need them. Some years ago, the late Beatle George Harrison confronted an intruder. As he was beaten, his wife was trying to fend off her husband's assailant, but was not faring well. Harrison then began doing one of the only things he legally could do in the U.K. to defend himself. He began yelling, "Hare Krishna!" He was badly beaten and the interior fled.

So people who say we don't need weapons today are deranged themselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNO2CUGPSl8&feature=youtu.be

36

Like Father, Like Son

by cofty in

when faced with awkward questions about the morality of god many christians respond by distancing themselves from the old testament and focusing on "gentle jesus meek and mild" of the new testament.. for bible-believing christians this is intellectually dishonest.. according to christian dogma jesus was the god of abraham isaac and jacob.

the logos, the alpha and omega who is "the same yesterday, today, and forever.".

he claimed that "he that has seen me has seen the father" and that "i and the father are one".. in short, christians assert that jesus is almighty god from all eternity.. it therefore follows that jesus was the god who ordered the nation of israel to take slaves as inheritable possessions.

Cold Steel

Cofty» I never [resort to name calling] - ever. I get called names by believers most days but I never respond in kind. It's ok I know you won't apologise for your lie.

Oh, really? You say that you never engage in name calling, but the first thing you do is say I'm a liar!
Then, in your very next post, you say:

You have done what every christian apologist does when challenged about God's appalling ethics; you lied.

So where did I lie that you should call me a liar?

I'm not saying that Israel did not take permanent slaves. They did not enslave, but were able to buy them from surrounding nations. Thus, according to the law:

As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their clans that are with you, who have been born in your land, and they may be your property. You may bequeath them to your sons after you to inherit as a possession forever. You may make slaves of them, but over your brothers the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another ruthlessly. (Leviticus 25:44-46)

The law stipulates that Israelites were not allowed to take a man by force: "Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death." (Exodus 21:16) This refers to any man. But if the man is already a slave, the law allows him to be purchased as property. Both the law and the gospel advocated that servants be loyal to their masters, and that masters be kind to their servants.

"Servants," wrote Peter, "be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle, but to the unjust." (I Peter 2:16) And Jesus referred to himself as a slave. "But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (Mark 10:42-46)

Atheists view this life as it. Period. But God created man to become like Him, and this earth as an exile and a place of testing and development. The law given to the people of God in all nations consist of compassion, respect, honor, loyalty, virtue, integrity and love for God and one's fellow man. And again, Christians believe trying to judge God without knowing what He knows is folly.

Those from pagan nations who were enslaved could have had it a lot worse. They had health care, shelter, the right to marry, food, a day of rest, and even though they could be inherited, they were often given their liberty. They also were frequently educated by their masters and were allowed to take part in the family's religion. And instead of being sent to the salt mines or slaving away in the fields, most were made domestic servants. That doesn't mean slavery is a great institution, but if I were a slave back then, I'd sure as hell would rather be a servant to Israelites than Edomites, Canaanites, Egyptians, Philistines or anyone else; because the Israelites knew they were stewards over their possessions.

That's what led Job to declare, “If I have rejected the cause of my manservant or my maidservant, when they brought a complaint against me, what then shall I do when God rises up? When he makes inquiry, what shall I answer him? Did not he who made me in the womb make him? And did not one fashion us in the womb?" (Job 31: 13-15)

Finally, if a slave did escape and flee, and sought assistance from another Jew, that Jew is prohibited by the law in turning the slave back over to his master. And in that day and under those circumstances, it wasn't that difficult to escape. There were no chains and most domestic servants had enough freedom that if they really had it bad, they could escape and know the other Jews couldn't drag him back bound and gagged. That's a strange form of slavery.
This isn't mere rationalization. Although I don't like the institution of slavery, where one man owns another, who am I, or you, to judge God? But what is your object? Is it that the God of Israel is a monster because he destroys the wicked and condones slavery? Or is it that He can't exist because a perfect being would not do such things...in your opinion?

As a believer in God, I don't feel I can judge Him. But if one doesn't believe in God, slavery isn't going to be a viable part of the debate as it neither proves nor negates His existence. God does not live by the U.N. mandates, nor does He share all of our values. "For my ways are not your ways, neither are your thoughts my thoughts. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8-9)

As for your other jabs, have fun. No matter what others say, you've already made your judgments. If I'm right, explain them to God. If you're right, then there's no right or wrong anyway. No one will have to answer for anything. Even history will eventually crumble to pieces and be forgotten.