Posts by Cold Steel

38

Talk to my Dad about beards.

by LovingLifeNow in

jw
friends

so i spoke to my elder dad the other day, and he asked if i still am sporting a beard.

i said yes, then i said, "i thought the society said its ok to have a neat trimmed beard now?

" he said "no, no, no..if you read the article , it says in countries where it is accepted" so my response was "ummm, its pretty accepted here in america"..which he says "it reflects your spirituality" "if another wittness saw you, they would know you are weak"...i was like, "ok, i don't get it, and i follow christ/god, not men..." then he said in his hall" if a brother came in with a beard , he would not have privelages" then i just gave up, and tried to change the subject..ugggggggggg if these people would just listen to themselves , they would see the sillyness of there teachings...

Cold Steel

StuckInARut2 » Great video. I've watched the video twice and wondered, if people shaved to keep even one person from stumbling, what if telling people to shave causes people to stumble?

Also, in the August 15 Watchtower 1954, where Jesus is clean shaven on the torture stake, behold, not only was Jesus clean shaven, check out the other guys. The one destined for Paradise, pictured on Jesus' right, also was beardless while the other criminal, the one who mocked, wore a beard.

The evil criminal also had body hair, and Jesus shaved under his arms.

It makes me wonder what would happen if people just began ignoring the policy (maybe after watching this video). What would they do? What could they do? Revoke privileges?

Imagine a policy based on one organizational leader trying to discredit his predecessor. It's almost Marxist in its simplicity! Was it accompanied by banning Russell's writings? Why not just eliminate people with beards?

15

This really does not end well for God.

by pleaseresearch in

to say this whole creation thing has been or will be a success at the end is absurd.

not only did one third of the angels jump ship to satans side.

but adam and eve screwed up so quickly.

Cold Steel

Pleaseresearch » To say this whole creation thing has been or will be a success at the end is absurd. Not only did one third of the angels jump ship to Satans side. But Adam and Eve screwed up so quickly. Even before Adam and Eve sinned. Satan had turned on God. So it's really not gone well for him so far.

Christianity and atheism can't be settled by mere sophistry of this kind. You have no idea of what lay behind the war in heaven, as it's called. You also have little understanding of the fall of man and if Adam and Eve "screwed up" as you say. How do you know they screwed up? Given that God is all powerful and all knowing, it's difficult to believe that He would put Adam and Eve in a garden under the restrictions He gave them and not know in advance that they would fall.

How do you know He did not intend for man to fall?

Did God fully intend for man to remain in an ignorant state forever? Because of your religious background that's all you've been taught. But if the Redemption, or Atonement, of mankind enabled Adam and Eve and their descendants to become like God -- that is to have an immortal glorified body of flesh and bone and to be "like God" (see 1 John 3;2) -- then only by falling, becoming mortal and being redeemed could they complete the process. Thus, Satan's plan fails and God's plan succeeds.

This has been debated since St. Augustine and in far more detail. As Father Kallistos Ware notes in The Orthodox Way, "The source of evil lies thus in the free will of spiritual beings endowed with moral choice, who use that power of choice incorrectly." God could not make the choice of man's fall for him. He had to put him in a position where it was man's choice. Not evil, for the scripture states: "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever...[God] placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

How could man be evil if he had not that knowledge? And also, why would God keep man away from the tree of life, which would have given him immortality? The only logical conclusion is that man would have been trapped in an imperfect, immortal body for eternity with no possibility of growth.

"The effects of man's fall were both physical and moral," Ware notes. ...For death is not the end of life, but the beginning of its renewal." I believe he summed it up well when he wrote: "The Incarnation, then, is not simply a way of undoing the effects of [the fall], but it is an essential stage upon man's journey from the divine image to the divine likeness." In other words, we were created in the image of man, but we required the fall and the atonement to acquire God's likeness. It was God's plan all along, and Satan and his angels opposed it.

If one reads and understands the scriptures, God is always one step ahead of Satan and has provided man with limitless potential. Scoff at the creation if you will, but you've missed the heart of what's in the scriptures.

66

How Knowledge is Dissipated in Talks

by Cold Steel in

londo111 » each congregation has a “talk coordinator”.

talk coordinators will coordinate with other talk coordinators in order to find speakers to give the public talk on sunday.

typically, they come from the general area: the circuit or a nearby circuit.

Cold Steel

Cold Steel » ... the work will be done, either now or later, and it's really none of your business.

I'll give this to Cofty...it came out wrong and I apologize. I meant to convey that we believe it to be a matter left to the deceased. Again we mean no disrespect to the relatives. Still, all those who did not receive the Gospel here will receive it eventually anyway. It will just be later rather than sooner.

My point is, we believe it's for their good and that, being able to reject it is, or should be, their decision. Not their grandkids. Perhaps that's why the church is putting it off for a hundred years. If Jesus doesn't come, then the work will die on the vine. If he does, then minds will change.

Anyway I apologize if I offended.

66

How Knowledge is Dissipated in Talks

by Cold Steel in

londo111 » each congregation has a “talk coordinator”.

talk coordinators will coordinate with other talk coordinators in order to find speakers to give the public talk on sunday.

typically, they come from the general area: the circuit or a nearby circuit.

Cold Steel

Cofty » Your arrogance is astonishing.
Mormonism is every bit as obnoxious as the Watchtower.

See? Two sentences, zero substance.

I rest my case. Talk about arrogance.

66

How Knowledge is Dissipated in Talks

by Cold Steel in

londo111 » each congregation has a “talk coordinator”.

talk coordinators will coordinate with other talk coordinators in order to find speakers to give the public talk on sunday.

typically, they come from the general area: the circuit or a nearby circuit.

Cold Steel

Londo111 » the way you describe former Mormons (and their websites, books, ect...) sounds allot like how many JWs would describe former JWs, including this forum here.

Fair enough. And I can't deny the similarities. The JWs and the LDS both believe they have been commanded to preach the gospel in the latter days. Both have ruling councils that set policy and are expected to be treated as the Lord's anointed.

Where it gets dicey is that the JWs feel they were chosen, and the LDS feel they've been commissioned. No one in the JW church has heard a peep from God, whereas the LDS believe its leaders receive revelation through the ministration of angels, theophanies, visions, dreams and the whisperings of the Holy Spirit. JWs have no apostles or prophets, whereas the LDS has all of the ancient offices held in the early church.

Apostates are understandably treated similarly; however, the LDS have no shunning policies. We are in dispute with our apostates and would love to see them return. We intend no emotional harm, but we are taken back by their bitterness and sometimes hatred. They react the same way that JW apostates do and, to me, it's not the same.

David Jay » Please, stop and realize that you are doing something similar in your pro-LDS stand and comments here. You are welcome here, and there might be something helpful you have to offer that you learned from Mormonism that directly relates to JWs--but otherwise you need to realize that like my friend, we can't stomach hearing things from another proselytizing religion.

If you will examine my posts, I discuss Mormonism only when someone on his board uses it to attack something I say as it relates to the Jehovah's Witnesses. I don't bring up anything to proselytize, but many times it's initiated by atheists like Cofty, who would like to see this site directed by the atheist dissenters. I feel JWs who leave the sect make a mistake by turning their backs on religion, but I never push my own religion on them.

I'd prefer to leave my religion out of the discussion and never mention it again, but it seems the curse of the JW debate. It's why, when I talk to JW missionaries, that I refuse to tell them I'm LDS. It always turns into what's wrong with us instead of let's see what you teach from the Bible.

If someone uses this site to attack the LDS faith, I feel compelled to defend it; however, I'd much rather discuss the true problems of the JWs and leave Mormonism for its own website.

66

How Knowledge is Dissipated in Talks

by Cold Steel in

londo111 » each congregation has a “talk coordinator”.

talk coordinators will coordinate with other talk coordinators in order to find speakers to give the public talk on sunday.

typically, they come from the general area: the circuit or a nearby circuit.

Cold Steel

David Jay » When confronting LDS leaders again, we were told there was really nothing we could do to guarantee that it would never happen again. Mormons feel they must do this work, and despite the promises made, we were just going to have to live with this.

The church has no control over its individual members who are gathering names at random. Unless a way can be found to tag an individual for a hold on baptisms, there's no way to guarantee that they won't be. According to my sister, who's a genealogist, the church has cracked down on which names can be submitted. Sometimes names are submitted by converts to the church who had relatives in the Holocaust, and if the relation is right, they have the right to do so.

Baptism for the dead does not turn dead relatives into Mormons, but we believe that the dead are taught the gospel of Jesus Christ in the world to come. And though their work is done in temples, it is not ratified unless the dead on the other side approve of it.

When Jesus was on the cross, he told one of the condemned, "Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise." The apostle Peter said that when Jesus died, he went to the realm of the spirits and for the first time preached the gospel to those who had not the opportunity to hear it here:

18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
-- 1 Peter 3:18-21

The preaching of the gospel to the dead is unavoidable, and with all due respect to both you and your relatives, the work will be done, either now or later, and it's really none of your business. It's between your dead relatives (and mine) and God. If they choose not to avail themselves of the work done here, all they have to do in the next is refuse it. Out of respect I'm willing to halt it for now, but it will eventually be done.

6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. --1 Peter 4:6

The whole idea behind Christian work for the dead is that men may progress and grow in the world to come as if they were still in the flesh, yet they will continue to live on in the spirit. You think you're protecting your relatives and honoring their memory, while you may actually be holding them back.

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto [God], then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
-- 1 Corinthians 15:28-29

You think we are desecrating the names of your dead, when in fact, no man can see the Kingdom of Heaven without baptism and the conferral of the Holy Spirit. Presently, according to my sister, the church tells members that a person must be dead for more than a hundred years before their work can be done (it used to be one year), but what do you think will happen after a hundred years? Or two hundred? The work will be done because we've been tasked to do it.

If the work we do is based on deception, and Jesus is not the Christ and all baptisms are for naught, none of it will make any difference. But if Jesus is the Christ, then what we do is for the benefit of all mankind.

We're presently in the times of the Gentiles (see Isaiah 11), but when the Gentiles reject the Gospel (and we know they're going to because we've already been told they will), then it will go back to the Jews.

And when the times of the Gentiles is come in, a light shall break forth among them that sit in darkness, and it shall be the fulness of my gospel; but they receive it not; for they perceive not the light, and they turn their hearts from me because of the precepts of men. And in that generation shall the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
(D&C 45:28–30)

The Jews will not always reject the Messiah, according to our understanding of the scriptures, and upon his return, the times of the Jews will come again, and the first will be last and first again. No offense is intended in our work for the dead and it does not increase our numbers or benefit us in any way.

66

How Knowledge is Dissipated in Talks

by Cold Steel in

londo111 » each congregation has a “talk coordinator”.

talk coordinators will coordinate with other talk coordinators in order to find speakers to give the public talk on sunday.

typically, they come from the general area: the circuit or a nearby circuit.

Cold Steel

Cofty » Thousands of ex-Mormons all relate similar stories of cultish manipulation.

Thousands, eh? And you've waded through these thousands of poor ex-Mormons and have concluded they're all victims of a cultist religion? I'm impressed by the time and study you've put in on it, and your dedication to studying both sides and you're ability to ferret out the truth no matter where it resides.

Latter-day Saints believe that marriage in the Lord is for time and all eternity, and that families can be sealed together here and have those sealings in force in the world to come. So some guy starts reading anti-Mormon literature and comes to the conclusion that Joseph Smith was nothing more than a charlatan or a kook, and he decides to quit the church. Okay, he's got that right. No shunning there. He keeps his friends, but let's say he's married. He no longer wants to attend church, nor does he want his children to, either.

But his wife is devastated. She was married in the temple and she had certain expectations based on sacred and solemn covenants taken therein. She wants a family in the church and had every right to expect it. Yet he signs on to one of your ex-Mormon boards and complains that the church is interfering in his family and is influencing his wife (who wants the kids to continue going to church) and may even take her side in wanting a divorce.

Now is this cultish?? If so, you're seeing only his side. What if Joseph Smith wasn't a charlatan? His wife had the choice of marrying a non-Mormon and decided to marry a man determined in the faith. They made sacred vows together in holy places. Now the church is to blame for getting involved in a family matter that the wife wants. She doesn't want an ex-Mormon for a husband -- someone who sits on his ass on Sunday and can't baptize their children or administer priesthood blessings; who makes snide remarks about the church and undermines the faith of the children.

You can't put all these ex-Mo's in a basket and write them off as cult activity. So when he posts these same snide, often obscene criticisms with no one knowing the other side of the story, guys like you say, "Yeah, these cults are awful. They should just stay out of family matters." So go back and read my post again. You may SAY you're not a typical atheist, Cofty, but let someone say something religious that you don't agree with, and all you leave is are one- or two-sentence rejoinders of ridicule with absolutely no substance. This is typical for atheists, yet you say you're not of that stripe.

You're free to your own opinions, but I know what JW life and religion are like and I know what Mormon life and Protestant life are like, and I wouldn't tolerate JW cultisms for an instant. But I have considerable freedom to believe and say what I want in the Mormon faith. If women want to be ordained to the priesthood and they actively lobby the church for it, they shouldn't be surprised to be excommunicated. Is that cultish? All these things are moot, and you have to do quite a bit of stretching to turn the Mormon church into Jehovah's Witnesses.

Joe134cd » I could see it as been nothing but a good thing if there was more cross over between the 2 movements. Welcome to you cold steel and I always enjoy reading your posts.

Thank you for your comments, but as I tried to tell Cofty, I believe the two movements to be radically different. I don't mind civil discourse at all, but when people like me are banned from defending the church, often with no comment, there can be no meeting of the minds. This board is how it should be. Some of the obscenities and completely godless and rude remarks on the ex-Mo boards just make me want to have nothing to do with them. They're always happy to hear from folks like you. With me, not so much.

Check out this address:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSwccNZ_mmo&t=314s

66

How Knowledge is Dissipated in Talks

by Cold Steel in

londo111 » each congregation has a “talk coordinator”.

talk coordinators will coordinate with other talk coordinators in order to find speakers to give the public talk on sunday.

typically, they come from the general area: the circuit or a nearby circuit.

Cold Steel

Cofty » If anybody wants to know the reality about the Watchtower they need to talk to ex-JWs. If anybody wants to know the truth about Mormonism they need to talk to ex-Mormons.

You believe that...really?

You actually believe that if one wishes to know the reality of atheism, one needs to talk to ex-atheists? That if one wants to know the truth about Darwinism, they need to talk to ex-Darwinists? That's a unique and disturbing methodology, Cofty, and I'm amazed you would espouse it. I have visited such sites, and I'm amazed you would find them a viable path to truth.

As a Latter-day Saint, I look at the background and scholastical degrees of our proponents, in and out of the church. Noted archeologists, geologists, anthropologists, historians, doctorates in ancient scripture, early Christianity and even in Islamic Studies, while many of our ex-Mormon websites, according to one of our “cult apologists” consists of (and I agree) “displays of bravado, strutting, believers’ arguments completely misunderstood and misrepresented, bold challenges hurled out to those who are barred from responding, and guffaws of triumph over enemies who are not permitted to reply. Dissent is rigidly excluded...even as its denizens criticize the Church for its supposed ‘repressiveness.’”

One of the ones you mentioned, says our apologist (Dr Daniel C. Peterson, and I agree), “is rife with personal abuse and bloodcurdling hostility, not uncommonly obscene, directed against people they don’t know and haven’t even met – against President Hinckley, Joseph Smith, the Brethren, the general membership of the Church, and even, somewhat obsessively, against [myself].

“Ordinary members of the Church – Morgbots or Morons or Sheeple, in the jargon of the board – are routinely stereotyped as insane, tyrannical, cheap, bigoted, ill-mannered, irrational, sexually repressed, stupid, greedy, foolish, rude, poor tippers, sick, brain-dead, and uncultured. There was once even a thread – and I’m not making this up – devoted to discussing how Mormons noisily slurp their soup in restaurants. Posts frequently lament the stupidity and gullibility of Church leaders, neighbors, parents, spouses, siblings, and even offspring – who may be wholly unaware of the anonymous poster’s secret double life of contemptuous disbelief.”

I, myself, tried defending the church once or twice on two of these sites in 2006, and found myself barred from posting. Fortunately that doesn't happen here and active JWs are actually encouraged to defend their beliefs on this board if they can. But do you truly think I needed to land here to discover the truth about “The Truth”? No. I originally came here hoping to talk to believers -- people willing to answer questions about their beliefs. But then I began reading their stories and I decided to stick around because I found them fascinating and others even heat rending.

So use whatever methodology suits you to arrive at what you think is the truth. I've got the time and patience to wait and see who's right.

66

How Knowledge is Dissipated in Talks

by Cold Steel in

londo111 » each congregation has a “talk coordinator”.

talk coordinators will coordinate with other talk coordinators in order to find speakers to give the public talk on sunday.

typically, they come from the general area: the circuit or a nearby circuit.

Cold Steel

Diogenesister » Having got a request years later to give a talk at a KH he decided to go for it. Here is the result.

After the talk what happened? Did they realize their mistake immediately? Who was it who first realized that a subliminal message was being sent. I was amazed when they cut of his mic. Did they usher him into a back room?

It was masterfully done. Did he leave immediately or stick around?

Did they find his body in an ally, gutted out and a Red John smiley face painted in his blood on the bricks facing the front?

Did they keep him on the list?

66

How Knowledge is Dissipated in Talks

by Cold Steel in

londo111 » each congregation has a “talk coordinator”.

talk coordinators will coordinate with other talk coordinators in order to find speakers to give the public talk on sunday.

typically, they come from the general area: the circuit or a nearby circuit.

Cold Steel

Cofty » I watched a documentary about mormon missionaries in the UK. It was the weirdest thing I have ever seen. You are a controlling, dehumanising cult every bit as much as the WT.

Well, Cofty, if you're right I haven't seen it. I'm familiar with every website you listed and I invite people to check out each one of them if they wish to hear incessant atheistic whining, but they'll learn little about the real church. Interestingly, I've met most of the people who have created and run those websites.

As for dehumanizing, I can't think of anything more dehunanizing as atheism and Darwinism, which you espouse. Check out these websites.

All About Creation and Darwinism

Darwinian Evolution

Creation Versus Evolution

Creation or Evolution: Does It Matter What You Believe?

See, anyone can post websites. But one thing I've noticed about your posts, Cofty, is that you'll write substantive posts on evolution and atheism, but on religion and matters you don't know much about, you resort to insults and name calling. You don't know anything about the Book of Mormon or how it came to be, but you do know how to use Google and you can copy links and find anti-Christian and anti-Mormon websites. Being familiar with the latter, I know that most of them were initiated by and maintained by a mere handful of malcontents. You're also completely ignorant of the websites written and maintained by active, believing members of the church who defend it, many of them with degrees in ancient scripture, history, geology, anthropology, archeology, theology and journalism, to name a few.

I know nothing about these sites I posted. I don't know who wrote them or what their qualifications are. I do know how the authors feel about evolution and that's all I need to know for the sake of this post. And that's all you did. As an atheist, you're sloppy in your research. I understand you got burned by the WTB&TS and that you reacted by rejecting all things having to do with God.

The websites you posted are exclusively anti-Mormon are the same ones you've posted before. You simply copy and paste. I didn't see one with a balanced view. (In fact, one was written by a friend of mine with whom I strongly disagree, but I could tell you stories on why he is like he is; but he's hardly upfront about them on his site.)

So the next time you run that list, why don't you add this one?

Evidences of the Mormon

It's all about objectivity. When it comes to what's important to you, you make it a point to be well read and as informative as you can. But when it comes to religion, Google is your only friend. You put anything you don't like into your cult basket and dismiss it with insults. Why? You got burned.

Again, with 45 years under my belt, I've NEVER had the slightest problem with my church lording itself over me in a dictatorial manner. I can have a beard, use any kind of after shave I want, dress however I wish and read whatever I want. We have none of the restrictions the JWs have, so why keep trying to dump us all into the same pot?