Cold Steel

Joined

• started 158 topics
• posted 2,168 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Cold Steel

• 
  4

  Surprise Adam and the writer of Genesis.....

  by James Mixon in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  it's possible human were living in southern calif 130000 years ago.

  yes young people were surfing at the beach, snow skiing down the mountains unaware that adam and eve believe they were the only ones on earth...lol.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  That's it? It's possible?

  Sounds solid to me.
• 
  27

  Acts 17;24

  by jehovahs is dead in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  First, I question most of the crap seen in these posters. Having studied mythologies, much of it is pure garbage. If the stories are read next to each other, the similarities pretty much vanish. Where, for example, does it state that Krishna or Horus were born on December 25? And why should it matter since Jesus was born in April or early May? Anyone can post anything without documentation, and there's precious little of it in such charts.
• 
  34

  Are there 'ultra strict' congregations?

  by jambon1 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when i studied as a young adult, it was in one of those congregations.

  having viewed the religion as a quaint little band of christians it conpletely dumbfounded me when i was told about such rules as 1 - no beards.

  2 - you must wear a suit to meetings and while giving a talk.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  But what are the consequences of not grooming according to rules set by the elders? If someone moves from KH-1, where there are liberal grooming rules, to KH-2, where they're considerably more strict, what happens then? Are they counseled to follow the new rules and if so, how would that happen?

  Are people encouraged to visit KHs just off the street, or are they expected to have a few lessons first? If a stranger walked in, I'm sure he'd be welcomed, but would he be openly proselytized? (I'm sure there are certain meetings where visitors would be less welcome, though.)
• 
  343

  I hate the Watchtower but I really still hate the Trinity Jesus is NOT God!

  by Witness 007 in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  some bibles use the term "worship" when refering to jesus...at times people did fall down and bow to him........this doesn't show he was god!

  the greek term; proskeyneo, means to prostrate oneself, to bow down and show honour.

  now, this was done for jehovah.....and his representatives....jesus israelite kings and priests....but for the honour of jehovah not as creature worship which even angels would refuse.. also i studied the non-biblical early church gospels which really does show a slow decline over 150 years, into the trinity as the watchtower claims...........although i still hate the watchtower society at least i learnt something that wasn't a lie..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  My own belief is that Jesus is Jehovah, but that Jehovah is the SON, not the FATHER. When MAN fell, the FATHER no longer could communicate with MAN directly. He needed a mediator. Yahweh was that mediator, and in morality He was known as Joshua/Jesus. This is why their titles were the same. At the end of the Millennium, Yahweh will return the earth to the Father redeemed and glorified.

  And thus His role will be complete. Remember that Jesus overlooked Jerusalem and lamented over it, saying, "How oft would I have gathered thee under my wings as a hen gathereth its chicks, and ye would not."

  How could he have said this if he were not Jehovah?
• 
  17

  Marry Only in the Lord

  by Rattigan350 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  last night at the meeting, a local needs talk preempted the regularly scheduled part.

  an elder who is the most society following elder talked about loving god and then he talked about bible principles such as marry only in the lord.

  he talked of deut.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  Stuckinarut2 » Wow, so he actually said this was a "marking" talk? That is not supposed to happen nowadays.

  What's a "marking talk" ?

  
  
• 
  14

  If you had to choose

  by dothemath in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  if you had to choose to belong to 1 religion, i was curious as to what any on the forum would pick.. i realize most here are likely atheist (i would have to say i'm agnostic), but if any would like to share their opinion, and maybe why?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  I'm a Mormon as many of you know. BUT if I were not a latter-day saint, I'd be an Orhodox Christian. (I might join Blondie's church, but there's a waiting list.)
• 
  12

  Only Jehovah's people

  by rebel8 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  today i went to a large talk.. there was no arguing or swearing, just kindness and respect.. it was orderly and calm.. trash was put in the proper place.

  people were even picking up litter that wasn't even theirs.. the speakers were passionate and inspiring.. the entire event was orchestrated by volunteers.. it was march for science, not a dub ass-embly.

  so much for "only jehoopla's people" behaving like this at large events..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  Rebel8> It was March for Science, not a dub ass-embly. So much for "only Jehoopla's people" behaving like this at large events.
  

  Yes, but they're gonna be destroyed during Armageddon while all those stuffy old elders at the Kingdom Hall and the people at those events are going to be saved in Paradise Earth. (Gloat, gloat!) The birds of prey are gonna eat those science march people to the bones. Pick a little, peck a little.
• 
  5

  Eschatology based faith

  by Steel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  my wife recently took a week off work to pioneer which really pissed me off because it kind of pissed away our summer holidays.

  of course i asked my typical questions about " do you actually know what the new covenant is ?

  or what is the point of all this time with the new understanding of the faithful slave.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  Still, there are certain rules one must adhere to, not only in biblical exegesis, but apocalyptic exegesis as well. Numbers, beasts, prophecy all mean certain things and one can't just take a translation and delve into the text without knowing the rules. And this is what the JWs do all the time. (And it's a reason they've yet to be right about anything.) You also can't tell them anything, either. They could take analytical courses that would help them understand beasts, numbers and rules that can't be abrogated or ignored, but one would have to go take college grade courses and above, and higher education, as we all know, is a distraction.

  I've read the red Revelation book one of them gave me several times, and the interpretation they apply is so precise that it could only be interpreted by someone who knows the rules and has the Spirit of God; for what is given by revelation can only be interpreted by revelation. The problem is, the Slave has never claimed to have either the understanding or the inspiration. In fact they have repeatedly told the world that they do not receive revelation or inspiration in the same fashion as the apostles. One wonders, well, in what fashion do the members of that august body receive inspiration and guidance which is revelation but is not revelation, and is inspiration but is not inspiration?

  How are people to know whether they are numbered with the anointed class if it is not revelation? And how can the Slave know that the two prophets of Revelation 11 are really a bunch of 1919 Bible Students released that year so they could begin preaching again (thus being resurrected on the streets of Jerusalem, which is another term for the church. That leap makes the one Eval Knieval took across the Grand Canyon look like a kid's hop, skip and jump exercise! It violates everything we know about eschatological exegesis, and giving it in a paper with real scholars would be a supreme embarrassment. Now if the Slave claimed revelation, it would simply be their word against everyone else's; however, since they have said they don't receive revelation, then how could they possibly know?

  The entire GB=FDS equation is based on one verse in Matthew 24. But ask any JW to show you another scripture that has a similar interpretation. Or, when two prophets in an apocalyptic book are murdered and then resurrected on the streets of Jerusalem "where our Lord was crucified" -- ask them to find a similar verse that had a metaphorical interpretation. When apostles and prophets took the time to be so precise, it's highly unlikely they refer to something completely different.

  Cobweb > The book of Revelation does not apply to our time. It was describing an imminent end just as Paul also expected an end in their lifetime. It has references to the Roman Empire. The mark of the Beast 666 or 616 as they think it is now, is a code number that identifies a specific Roman emperor.

  There are numerous reasons this can't be true. The Beast to which this person refers never fulfilled any of the prophecies applied to him and they were made after the destruction of Jerusalem. There was no mark on the hand or forehead employed by which people could buy or sell. And the Beast was very carefully associated with a ruler described by Daniel, which the emperors of Rome never fulfilled or bore the slightest resemblance to.

  You say the King of the North and the King of the South were "the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucid's of Syria, literally to the North and South of Israel in the second century when Daniel was written." But how would you know that since you yourself said "these biblical apocalypses are failed prophecy and they have [no] relevance for us." You're doing the same thing the JWs are doing, but in reverse. The fact that you say these were "failed prophecy" could just as easily mean they don't refer to the Greek sub-kingdoms you say they do.
• 
  34

  Are there 'ultra strict' congregations?

  by jambon1 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when i studied as a young adult, it was in one of those congregations.

  having viewed the religion as a quaint little band of christians it conpletely dumbfounded me when i was told about such rules as 1 - no beards.

  2 - you must wear a suit to meetings and while giving a talk.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  Jambon1 > Also, they had a white shirt in the cloak room for any visiting elders who showed up to give a public talk wearing a coloured shirt.
  

  Okay, I take it that elders wear white shirts, but only while giving talks or all the time?

  Relating to the beard issue, let's say I have a neatly trimmed beard and am doing the Bible study thing. When do they tell me the beard has to go?

  Before baptism or after baptism? And have any of you had the distinct experience of informing someone with a beard that it has to go, or do the elders do that? Any interesting reactions that anyone can share?

  What if someone resists? Or says that their skin breaks out? Or they have a sales job and that their beards hide a droopy neck or something?
• 
  7

  Baptism as a Symbol of Dedication - Anther unbiblical doctrine of men

  by doubtfull1799 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i'm not sure if this has been discussed before - i did a brief search and couldn't find anything on this particular aspect.. for those atheists who believe it is all nonsense anyway, feel free to ignore this post.

  i happen to be of that same persuasion but i still enjoy discussing it on a philosophical level.

  its funny how you may have left because of the more "out there" doctrines and chronology etc not making sense and you come to see that they are going "beef the things written", but the longer you're out and the more you think about your old beliefs, even the most common basic or "fundamental" doctrines are also "going beyond the things written.. baptism as a symbol of dedication is a case in point.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Cold Steel

  Baptism was viewed by the early Christians as more than just an outward display of inward commitment, but as a covenant. That's why John 3:3-7 records:
  

  3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

  4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?

  5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

  6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

  7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

  Baptism is required for all men (and women) who gain eternal life. This is what was meant as being born of the water. Being born of the Spirit is receiving the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands. The JWs believe that all who are baptized receive the power to become ministers of God with the authority to preach, teach, expound, exhort and baptize. The strange thing is, men cannot baptize their own children in the Organization, though I know of nothing that specifically prohibits it. The Organization won't recognize it as official unless it has one of its own elders perform it and until the baptizee answers a pledge of loyalty to the Society.

  The Bible never specifically states what will happen to those who never have the opportunity of being baptized. If someone must have these to gain eternal life, that leaves a lot of people seemingly hanging. The Bible also never answers the questions of how to baptize, who may baptize and what one must say while performing it. When ancient ordinances were performed in the Old Testament, they required that the priests do it. We also know the first century Christian Church had priests, deacons, teachers, bishops, seventy and elders. Did these positions require ordination and instruction? We don't know because the Bible was never intended to be a church manual. We know that Jesus ordained his apostles, but beyond that, nothing.