Posts by Cold Steel

9

Christianity (Including JWs) Debunked

by HowTheBibleWasCreated in

1 cor.

15: 21,22 rnwt: for since death came through a man,+ resurrection of the dead also comes through a man.+ 22 for just as in adam all are dying,+ so also in the christ all will be made alive.. .

so according to the nt jesus makes alive those that die in adam.. given the overwhelming evidence that adam as a man did not exist jws lose the battle on this verse.. however foolish christians like pentecostals and catholics like to call adam figurative.. okay... read it again^^^^^^... .

Cold Steel

The reality of Adam wasn't even questioned by the early brethren. The term "quickening spirit," of course, means, "the living spirit," which scholars have said is an esoteric term referring to the perfected physical body of Jesus after the resurrection.

Most often people think of spirit as being non-corporeal, but it refers to the physical body animated by spirit. (Cited by Nibley as: It has been shown that the term "the Living Jesus" (and even kyrios) refers specifically to the risen Lord, Schmidt, Gespräche Jesu, 264; cf. James Rendel Harris, The Odes and Psalms of Solomon: Now First Published from the Syriac Version (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909), 73. Thus the same value must be given to the opening line of the Gospel of Thomas 80:10 (=NHLE 32:10, p. 118), as to the Oxyrhynchus Logia, no. 8 (1): "sayings which Jesus who liveth and was dead spake to Judas Thomas"; cf. Gospel of Thomas 99:7-8 (=NHLE 51:7-8, p. 129). The conversational and questioning form of discourse is another clue, Schmidt, Gespräche Jesu, 206; Puech and Quispel, "Les écrits gnostiques du Codex Jung," 9, n. 3; Gospel of Thomas 81:14-17 (=NHLE 33:14-17, p.118); Oxyrhynchus Logia, 4-5, 13 (6), 8 (1); a large number of the pseudo Acts in E.A. Wallis Budge, Contendings of the Apostles (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1935), begin with the Apostles questioning Christ after the Resurrection. Where an account of the Resurrection or Descensus is included in the report the setting is naturally post-resurrectional: this refers to all the apocrypha mentioned below, notes 63-66. The 40-day situation is implied where the resurrection of others is described, as in the second Akhmim fragment of the Gospel of Peter, in ANT, 508; Gospel of the Twelve Apostles 2, in PO 2:135; and Acts of Thomas 54-55, in ANT, 390-91. The Prologue to the Discourse on Abbatôn purports to offer documentary evidence from the hands of the Apostles for the typical 40-day situation it describes, in E.A. Wallis Budge, Coptic Martyrdoms (London: British Museum, 1914; reprinted New York: AMS, 1977), 225—26, 474-75.)

33

The reality of "shunning" and character assasination highlighted at the Australian Royal Commission

by stuckinarut2 in

once again, the arc has brilliantly highlighted the reality that any witness who either fades or disassociates is subjected to active official shunning by the organization.. the "brothers" tried to state that it was the choice of the indiviual who steps away from the organization to shun them!

they actually tried to make it out to be the fault of the one who leaves!

then they tried to say that those who fade are not shunned!.

Cold Steel

Has anyone done any research on the relationship between shunning and suicide inside the Society?

496

This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

by cofty in

sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

Cold Steel

Konceptual99 » So when a father abuses his child is this permissible and acceptable either because the father has an absolute right to do as he pleases with his child or that Jehovah has the right to allow any amount of suffering to the child?

No, it has to do with the Plan we all agreed to before entering mortality. No true harm can befall us in mortality, and all infants who die automatically gain eternal life. Since infants are without sin, they gain this blessing as part of their heritage. If we shed the blood of an infant, this is murder and it disqualifies us from eternal life (see 1 John 3). Yahweh is the judge and chief arbiter of sin and this was with our consent before we were born. The idea isn't to survive death, but to be redeemed from it.

496

This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

by cofty in

sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

Cold Steel

Cofty » So murdering millions of innocent children in natural disasters is for the greater good is it?

So who gets to define murder? And how does one rightfully charge God with murder when He is the chief judge and arbiter? If God created man and if man has free agency and is an eternal being, like God, being created in His image, then He is quite incapable of being murdered by God, for his mortal body ceases to exist and his spirit continues on. The body, according to Christian theology, is merely a shell (and a burdensome one at that). People don't cease to exist at death, and those children you seem so fond of protecting are, in reality, are actually adults in spirit. Even Jesus, the greatest, wisest and most powerful of all, was at his birth in mortality, a spewing, gurgling and helpless infant who had to be rushed off to Egypt by his parents to escape being murdered by Herod. But what was He before He was born? He was the great Yahweh, the God of Israel, the One who taught Moses, the Great Lawgiver, for hours at a time. So what do you know of those who were “murdered” in natural disasters or by God's hand?

Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? Or hast thou walked in the search of the depth? Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? Or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death? Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? Declare if thou knowest it all!

Where wast thou when He laid the foundations of the earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? Or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? Or who laid the cornerstone thereof; when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

For all you know, you were one of those sons of God...or not, how would you know? “What is man, that thou art mindful of him, and the son of man, that thou visitest him? For thou hast made him a little lower than the gods, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet.” As John declared, “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.”

Jehovah's Witnesses see man as being little more than an afterthought on God's part, but who knows the width, breadth and depth of God's works and His plans? You can speak with some knowledge about evolution, Cofty, but your knowledge of God and His ways is sorely lacking, as is any mortal's. You can only only build up strawmen, then knock them down; but it's amazing how people like you feel qualified to sit in judgment of God. To put it in terms you can understand, it would be like a 4-year old sitting in judgment of Darwin's theories.

Just Fine » Mormons made up a whole book, given to a crook on golden tablets only he could read. It tells of the Lamanites, Nephites, and others who supposedly came to North America, and yet there is not a shred of historical evidence to support it. All religions have their own delusions. Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses just think their beliefs make them morally superior to everyone else. It must be hard being the chosen one of God.

Uh-huh...and tell me, how, exactly, you know there's not a shred of historical evidence to support the Book of Mormon? Did you read that somewhere? People say there's no evidence, but not those who have actually studied the evidences. Do you even know where the events in the book were supposed to have taken place? Do you know that the places Nephi described as taking place in the old world actually exist and that no one knew anything about them in 1830? How would that be possible? Joseph Smith had never been to that part of the world, nor had anyone else living in the Western Hemisphere. Even Bedouins in the Arabian Peninsula tended to be locals -- they didn't travel all over the land. Yet if Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, he would have had to have traveled it. So, again, how would you know there's no historical evidence?

496

This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

by cofty in

sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

Cold Steel

Just Fine » I agree, if God exists and is all powerful, surely he could make it clear. I pointed out to a Mormon once - so you are telling me God cares whether you drink hot beverages, but he doesn't care about the millions starving to death?

The problem is, everyone wants to set the policy and make the rules, and that just doesn't happen. For example, you begin your discussion with the Mormon by assuming God cares whether you drink hot beverages, strong drink or smoke cigarettes. (Well, yes, He does, but not even many Mormons know the entire story of the health code known as the Word of Wisdom.)

When that was given, the Lord said specifically that it was not by "command or constraint," but by a word of Wisdom. Well, the Mormons drank, smoked and hacked their way from Illinois and Missouri all the way to Utah and Idaho. When they got to the great Salt Lake and were instructed to build the Temple (it wasn't the first in Utah, btw), the project took them forty years. Brigham Young got up at one of first conferences and said, we've had this word given to us, not by commandment, and we drank and smoked the whole way out here. I propose we take all the money we spend on this stuff and we put it all towards the Temple fund. The people thought it over, it sounded good to them, so they voted what the heck.

So they did it. Fast forward forty years. The Temple was built, the church noticed its alcoholism and other health problems had vanished, no spitoons, no bars -- so we put it up for a vote to make it permanent and binding and it passed! So that's how it became binding. It was voluntary and made a covenant.

So historically it wasn't a huge doctrine.

As for those starving to death, dying from genocide and so forth, as unfortunate as it is, God is under certain obligations pertaining to our mortality. There are arguably good reasons He doesn't prove His existence and it's all been revealed, but morality and religion are all dispensed on God's terms and it all has to do with balance, free agency and obedience. It also has to do with a master plan we all agreed to before coming here, according to our religion. Suffice it to say that happiness and prosperity is all tied to obedience.

Atheists approach man's existence as an enemy to God, accusing Him of murder and hypocrisy. Mormons and most other Christians approach Jehovah's Witnesses as retrograde religionists. On a board of former JWs, the issue is atheism versus the governing body. One can be true, but not others. Many religions revere the name Jehovah, but not the claims, name or theology of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

"Well, they're all ridiculous!" atheists say, and on the surface I can understand that. But not from a human dignity standpoint. The blood transfusion issue, and especially shunning. But again, it's JW or nothing for most. And for atheists, God is a murderer. He advocates slavery and injustice. It's a somewhat inconsistent stance because, according to them, we're all going to end up dead anyway; yet God ultimately saves us from that in most religions.

...

80

Lots Of Whining And Complaining About Us JW's

by Deaconblues1914 in

in reading these posts, it sounds like a lot of you are very jealous of the wt.

society’s annual income and the money they/we have in the bank.

jehovah has indeed blessed us.

Cold Steel

I've noticed that DeaconBlues1914 doesn't react to your arguments. Instead, he spouts diatribes -- statements of his own beliefs. Clearly he's here to preach and not be preached to. And he has no respect for your beliefs. To him, you're base apostates, clearly not worth responding to. It's ironic that he calls himself "deacon" (even though it's most likely a musical reference). A deacon is an office in the early Christian church that is not found anywhere in the Watchtower church. At any rate, he's clearly not interested in discourse, or reason, nor do I believe he's truly interested in reclamation; rather, he may simply be trying to jinn up points for his weekly stats and little more.

If he doesn't specifically address your arguments or concerns, you may wish to divert your attention to more constructive pursuits. And if you ask him a question and he deflects, chances are he's also ill-equipped to deal with theological concepts with which he's unfamiliar.

If you were an active member and was doing what he's doing, how would you record it in your weekly records? I imagine Deac is reaching quite a few people. But he's not having a necessarily effective time doing it! Additionally, I suspect his superiors might not fully support his missionary endeavors. Coming to a place like this and discussing theology might result in further apostasy, not less.

18

new strategy to turn in your time in Japan

by yoko N in

jw.org stickers are passed around among publishers.one brother says "hey you can just turn in your time just driving around streets with this sticker on your car.

" the other side of this car ,(photo) there is a qr code sticker on it.. .

Cold Steel

Sometimes it's easy to get carried away! Years ago in California, there were places that would paint your car if you'd be willing to let them put an ad on. Many of the paint jobs were great, but few of them were tasteful.

80

Lots Of Whining And Complaining About Us JW's

by Deaconblues1914 in

in reading these posts, it sounds like a lot of you are very jealous of the wt.

society’s annual income and the money they/we have in the bank.

jehovah has indeed blessed us.

Cold Steel

DeaconBlues1914 » I actually am starting to feel sorry for "some" of you. I'm sure some of you are very good, decent, God-fearing people. For these individuals, I hope you truly find your way back home. Jesus will close the door soon folks. You think this world will get any better? It's getting worser and worser very fast. Yes. Time is of the essence folks.

Wait...How about those of us who aren't JWs nor have ever been one? As a professed Christian, can you really condemn those of us who have never been in "the truth"? I mean, for all we know you're a troll and nothing more. But if you're not, do you think a truly just God would ever really blister someone for acting according to a sincerely held belief in another religion? Or even if they're a truly sincere atheist, would a just God ice a person for eternity if they really and absolutely believed there was no divine being?

How could that be just?

After all, the only way a just God could justly put the squeeze on someone would be if HE proved to that person that HE actually existed and had a true religion. After all, man is inherently imperfect. Would a perfect God condemn an imperfect human for erring, especially on a matter so critical as religion? Yet that's what the JWs and many other religions believe.

25

It's right there in our faces, how could we NOT see it?

by NikL in

i know there have been many many posts on here over the years on the deity of jesus.. i am submitting this one because i am feeling a little confused.. the thing is, i am not the sharpest knife in the drawer and i know this.

so when i am going through my bible reading (to all you haters, yes i still do it) i see so many scriptures that just fly in the face of everything the jws teach about jesus.. i begin to wonder if indeed i am diseased in the mind ,as they will try to paint me, because it seems so plain to me.. i never even gave it a though growing up as to if jesus and god were equal.

i just didn't.. now when i read scriptures like philippians 9.... 9 for this very reason, god exalted him to a superior position+ and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name,+ 10 so that in the name of jesus every knee should bend—of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground+— 11 and every tongue should openly acknowledge that jesus christ is lord+ to the glory of god the father.. .

Cold Steel

Every other name that is named? As in Jehovah? This all from the JW.ORG Bible on their website. Can they REALLY read this and not see what I am seeing?

In a word, yes! The early Christians viewed Jesus and Yahweh as the same personality. When man fell, the Father could no longer communicate directly with man. Many modern Christians freely acknowledge that Jesus was the great mediator between his Father and mankind. But some, like the JWs, think this only kicked in around 33 A.D. Yet Jesus said, overlooking Jerusalem: "Oh, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets that are sent to them, how oft would I have gathered thee together, as a hen gatherest its chicks, yet ye would not!"

But how could he have gathered the city and its inhabitants together had he not been the great Jehovah, the God of Israel, as he began doing some 1850 years after the Romans dispersed them? Or after they were dispersed circa 600 B.C.? (Or was he speaking only of those who lived from 1-33 A.D.? Doesn't make much sense if that were the case, or if it had been Michael the Archangel making such a statement! How would Michael have had the authority to gather Judah throughout history both before and after the times of Jesus?)

So the name of Jesus also is the name of Jehovah, and Yahweh, and Jeshua! Unknowingly, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society chose the premortal name of Jesus. Both Yahweh and Jesus was the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Both were the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last, the great Judge of mankind (as you noted). When Moses spoke to Yahweh, he wasn't speaking to the Father, but to the great Mediator between God and man. This is because Jesus is both God and Man. It was the premortal Jesus who gave the stone tablets to Moses and who appeared to the seventy elders of Israel.

So despite all the early Christian extra-biblical writings and the Jewish writings in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the JWs have continued to believe their adventist roots. They'll never change their views and I'm surprised they never accepted the Saturday-Sabbath doctrine that also seeped into the movement.

You'll never get a JW admitting or acknowledging that Jesus is God in any way, shape or form, even after John pretty much spells it out in his Apocalypse (Revelation).

36

Anyone know what this sculpture is of the "torture stake?"

by charity7 in

hey guys!

i'm new on this site and am a non jw here married to a jw.

my husband's family are active members and they daily post articles on facebook from jw.org which i know is meant for me to see and read.

Cold Steel

Charity7 » ...the GB has basically given themselves Christ's authority....

Yet they call all other religions "manmade" as though it somehow legitimized their own faith. "Of course, I don't want to be part of a manmade religion," you tell yourself. "I want to be part of a religion Jesus personally picked when he was invisible in 1918!"

Yeah, so how do you know Jesus picked your religion in 1918?

“Well, who else's church would he have picked? We're the only one who correctly identified 1914 as the pivotal year of Christ's coming. We're the only ones that have a purely biblical doctrine. And the holy spirit revealed to us the true date of the destruction of Jerusalem as 607 BCE!"

Where do I sign up?