I wonder if any JW children believe that Caleb is real?
Pete Zahut ยป Caleb is a computer generated cartoon so he's resurrected electronically every time someone watches his antics on their screen.
what we need is clarification.
when caleb approached his mother and wants to know whether, in the resurrection, he will enjoy the heavenly hope or be a part of the "great crowd.
as he looks at her with his piercing black eyes, she reminds him that jehovah can't lie.
I wonder if any JW children believe that Caleb is real?
Pete Zahut ยป Caleb is a computer generated cartoon so he's resurrected electronically every time someone watches his antics on their screen.
what we need is clarification.
when caleb approached his mother and wants to know whether, in the resurrection, he will enjoy the heavenly hope or be a part of the "great crowd.
as he looks at her with his piercing black eyes, she reminds him that jehovah can't lie.
Hint:
Caleb DOESN'T Exist.
what we need is clarification.
when caleb approached his mother and wants to know whether, in the resurrection, he will enjoy the heavenly hope or be a part of the "great crowd.
as he looks at her with his piercing black eyes, she reminds him that jehovah can't lie.
What we need is clarification.
When Caleb approached his mother and wants to know whether, in the resurrection, he will enjoy the heavenly hope or be a part of the "great crowd."
As he looks at her with his piercing black eyes, she reminds him that Jehovah can't lie. When people die they "sleep" until the resurrection, she says. Then Jehovah reconstitutes them and they become part of one group or the other.
"Cool," says Caleb. "What group will I be part of?"
His mother smiles and replies, "You'll be part of the Santa Claus class."
"But mom," he says. "I thought Santa Claus was bad!"
"Santa Claus doesn't exist, Caleb. I thought we discussed that," his mother said.
"Yeah. We did, mom" Caleb says. "But how can I be resurrected to the same class as Santa Claus? He doesn't exist!"
รรรรรรรรรรร
Okay, you're Caleb's mom. What are YOU going to tell him?
...one question about anything and get a straight answer, what would it be?
historical, philosophical, theological, eschatological, anything.
.
They should have a video where Caleb discovers that Santa Claus isn't real. Then followed by a video where Caleb and Santa Claus discover that Caleb isn't real!
Wow.
...one question about anything and get a straight answer, what would it be?
historical, philosophical, theological, eschatological, anything.
.
There are some people out in cyberspace who try to provide answers to those with questions, but they're just members (JWAdvisors.com) with databases.
You state that Jesus is ruling invisibly, OK, I get that, but how do you explain that he is also mute?
I asked them that very thing. If the leaders do not receive revelation as the ancient leaders did, how would they know that Jesus returned invisibly? Especially when scripture clearly states that every eye shall see him.
Unfortunately, as soon as they ascertain that you're not red meat, they toss you aside, saying they don't have time to fool with you.
The two questions I put to them was the 1) 1914 invisible return one and 2) how they knew they were selected in 1918-9 as Jehovah's horse in the race?
Both are legitimate questions, of course. If you were to ask them:
What is the definition of 'soon'?
What could they say? Any day now? I was amazed that they referred me to their database for these questions.
How do they know about the selection of the Society in 1918-9? Here's a dump on all the articles that have been written in their magazines!
Circular reasoning. Very bizarre. The fellow defending the faith was very nice, but clearly out of his element. He wrote:
"I need to tend to my ministry, which does not include the command to preach to those who do not need a physician."
Yet, ostensibly, the purpose of his site was to answer questions outsiders had about the faith. He was very clear that he wouldn't answer questions by former JWs. I suppose the shunning policy applied. Serious inquiries and questions would be considered, but only if you were unhappy or had doubts about your present beliefs. But those stipulations are not anywhere on his website.
it my understanding that he's claiming that humans have lived on earth for millions of years.
it looks as though he's even showing different archaeological findings to support his claim.
he seams to be claiming that other inferior humanoids could not created some of the things found and i guess modern scientists would agree on that single piont.. its also if interest to find out that his religious beliefs maybe behind his ideas.
One way might be to find the oldest writing samples. If a civilization is said to have existed 250,000 years ago, but the earliest writing is only 5,000 years old, then I would have to doubt the first number.
As far as I know, no significant culture in Mexico pre-dates the Olmec culture, and that dates back to about 2500 B.C. And it came to a rather quick end in 400 B.C., most likely due because of war.
So if this super-ancient civilization has writings, that would go a long way in telling us more about them. Who were their kings? What were their modes of warfare? What was their size, physical characteristics and what happened to them? Were they destroyed or assimilated? How did they claim to get here?
If someone says a culture was here hundreds of thousands of years before other cultures, then I'm going to want more evidence than carbon dating. Civilizations cannot build cities and yet remain silent in the written word.
...one question about anything and get a straight answer, what would it be?
historical, philosophical, theological, eschatological, anything.
.
One question I'd ask is: If Jesus Christ came in 1914 BUT IT WAS INVISIBLE, and if He's ruling today AND IS DOING SO INVISIBLY, how would the Governing Body know unless its members can SEE invisible things?
And: If Jesus Christ came in 1918 and "chose" an earthly organization, which was the Bible Students, doesn't this mean the information was somehow conveyed to them them? If they don't receive any new information by way of revelation, and if they are not infallible, how can they make such claims with any degree of credibility?
I don't personally know what is in their own minds. Are they sincere? Do they believe it because they think it's true, or have they talked themselves into believing it? If I were a member of the GB, I'd be worried about which hand of the Lord I'd be standing on in the day of judgment. Anciently Jesus chose his apostles and said, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and ordained you." But today they say, "Ye have not chosen us, but we have chosen you and ordained ourselves."
How in the heck did that work out?? And Jesus signed off on that?
In the first case, Jesus was the proactive force. In the second He's the passive force. The GB is the proactive force. They appoint themselves, then assure everyone that God subsequently ratified it. But if it's true, it's a first with God because God has NEVER, EVER, operated that way in the past. He always went to His appointed LEADERS and chose them. Not once, EVER, did they go to Him and demand that they be called and chosen; it was ALWAYS the other way around.
So where, I would ask, can they find in the scriptures one instance where prophets or apostles chose themselves, then went to God and said, "Well, how about it? Are we acceptable to thee?"
...one question about anything and get a straight answer, what would it be?
historical, philosophical, theological, eschatological, anything.
.
"Why do hotdogs come in packs of four or eight and hotdog rolls come in packs of six or twelve?"
Good! Then there's the classic about why a tiny mosquito has many legs and wings to boot, while a lumbering elephant has only four legs to support its great weight. Doesn't seem philosophically fair.
...one question about anything and get a straight answer, what would it be?
historical, philosophical, theological, eschatological, anything.
.
No such question exists in my view. There are no straight answers.
Plenty of questions. Cofty could ask about reconciling evidence of an old earth with teachings of a new earth.
And others might ask:
And they can go on and on. These are only a few.
...one question about anything and get a straight answer, what would it be?
historical, philosophical, theological, eschatological, anything.
.
...one question about anything and get a straight answer, what would it be? Historical, philosophical, theological, eschatological, anything.