Posts by Cold Steel

35

The JWs slipped up again with the same Alpha and Omega error from 1978

by booker-t in

the saying people will make the same mistake over and over again is so true.

in the "revelation grand climax at hand" the revised one 2006 the wt again makes the same error and attributes the words at rev 22:12 to jehovah on pgs 306 and to jesus on the last page 319. you would think they would have learned their lesson from the 1978 wt blunder.

they almost use the same wording discussing the suddeness of jesus coming and jesus encourages his followers of his sudden coming and they list 5 scriptures and say jesus spoke them and one of the verses is (rev 22:12).

Cold Steel

Well, Lucifer means "son of the morning" or "morning star" (terms used for Venus). It has no reference to being a false sun except by association to the planet Venus by other cultures. Revelation isn't about astrology, for no one has been able to predict anything in the book using astrology signs or readings. It does use numerology, which was common in apocalyptic books like Daniel, and many of its prophecies have already taken place; and the rest appear to have excellent chances of being fulfilled.

35

The JWs slipped up again with the same Alpha and Omega error from 1978

by booker-t in

the saying people will make the same mistake over and over again is so true.

in the "revelation grand climax at hand" the revised one 2006 the wt again makes the same error and attributes the words at rev 22:12 to jehovah on pgs 306 and to jesus on the last page 319. you would think they would have learned their lesson from the 1978 wt blunder.

they almost use the same wording discussing the suddeness of jesus coming and jesus encourages his followers of his sudden coming and they list 5 scriptures and say jesus spoke them and one of the verses is (rev 22:12).

Cold Steel

One of the reasons they confuse the two is because Jehovah is the premortal Jesus. That's why their titles are the same. Both are King of Kings, Lord of Lords; both are the beginning and the end. Psalms 96:10 tells us that Jehovah "will judge the peoples with equity," whilst John tells us that the Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment to the Son (John 5:22). The confusion springs from the fact that when man fell, he no longer had the access to the Father, who previously "walked and talked" with Adam and his posterity. Now man needed a mediator, a go-between, and the Father's eldest Son was chosen.

So Elohim chose his eldest Son, Jehovah, and proclaimed him the Savior and Redeemer of the World. Knowing from the beginning that man would fall, he ordained his Son and sent him into the world to be lifted up by the wicked and slain. After the world is glorified and redeemed, at the end of the Millennium, he will present the world back to his Father, perfected.

50

Do You Fear Death?

by Cold Steel in

whether you're a former jw, or active jw, or some other religion, or atheist, what do you say?

do you fear death and, whether yes, no, or i don't know, why?

have changed religious views changed your view of death?

Cold Steel

Nope, I haven't left the building...I've just been recovering from surgery.

You guys display the hopes and pride many people feel, whether religious or not. Also, I'm not appealing to authority, but to logic.

If this life has meaning, it can only come from God. If we have a beginning, we also have an end. And if we are fully mortal, completely subject to death and a cessation of being, then how in the world can we find any meaning in anything we do.

Latter-day Saints believe in an eternal scheme of things. This life has meaning, not to be fulfilled here, but to develop us for the future. Do I believe Ecclesiastes is part of the Bible? Obviously, but I don't necessarily view it as scripture. Not all scripture is equal, and Solomon (like many others) reviewed his life in his last days and found himself wanting. He wasn't a prophet or priest, but a king. In his earlier days, before his transgressions and, some believe, his senility, his outlooks were quite different. It's the same with all of us. I read Ecclesiastes and think, here's a guy who had some serious issues. Could he possibly be happy? In his younger days, he most likely was impressed by the wisdom and intelligence of men, and about the accumulation of wealth. I don't believe for an instant that he was writing about what happens to us at death; rather, he was writing about how the wisdom of men is foolishness with God. Regardless how lofty man's thoughts are, in the end they perish with us. This doesn't mean we cease to exist. It means that from man's standpoint, nothing man does is lasting.

Now as far as early Christianity (and Mormonism) is concerned, one's purpose ceases when he no longer is able to progress. Origen, an early Christian theologian, writes: "After death, I think the saints go to Paradise, a place of teaching, a school of the spirits in which everything they saw on earth will be made clear to them. Those who were pure in heart will progress more rapidly, reaching the kingdom of heaven by definite steps or degrees." What does anything we do matter if our existence is to be cut off? Once the sun burns out and man's legacy is long forgotten, who will care about the sufferings, learning, wisdom, progress, civilizations and works of man? Unless another civilization masters space travel and records these things for others, it's all doomed to perish. You come to Earth and learn all your life and acquire wisdom, then you die. To me that's not a meaningful existence. We will be dead, our children and parents will be dust. At that time it won't make any difference whether you eased the sufferings of others or raised armies and committed genocide. There will be no memory or judgment; anything you learned will be lost.

Also, it's stated that no one can know what comes after death? That's like saying no one can possibly know if there's a Los Angeles. There are many accounts of people who say they visited Paradise (some were atheists). If they're being truthful, then it's possible that they know. Hallucinations are completely different from the accounts such people record. In hallucinations, details are vague and there's little intelligence in what is conveyed. Colors, clothing and such are foggy and the details are flighty, changing as quickly as the mind changes. Memory of hallucinations also are muted, but many near death experiences are vivid and as easy to remember as a conversation with your neighbor.

So again, what value are the things we're learning if everything is to be cut short? That's my question. And it's not meant to be insulting. Philosophers over the ages have been debating this as long as man has had language and the ability to communicate.

13

"New light" and BLOOD ...

by EdenOne in

i just had a flash in my head.. in the wt 07/2013, the "new light" is basically saying that there was no appointment of a faithful and discrete slave in the christian era until 1919. if this is true, then no "spiritual food at the proper time" was served after jesus' resurrection, for over 1886 years.

that means that the decree of the "apostles and older men" in jerusalem, recorded in acts 15:24-29, isn't "food at the proper time", and shouldn't be mandatory for christians.

this includes the order to "abstain from blood".

Cold Steel

I have no problem with the restriction of eating blood. I find it repulsive and can't even bring myself to eat one of those "blood oranges." So forget the blood pudding and other...ummm...delights. As for blood transfusions, the present policy of the JW Governing Board is just unbelievable. It's like saying, no graven images? Fine, throw away all your statues and photo albums! The Amish think photos are prideful and call attention from the Lord. And some African tribesmen think photos can steal the soul.

But how do they change the policy without looking like buffoons? You can't. Your only choice is to just continue the doctrine or leaving it up to the members to decide.

BTW, what is the policy on using your OWN blood in surgery? You know, giving blood before an operation, having it frozen or preserved and then used months later when you have surgery. Do they say it's like drinking your own blood?

When they talk about "light," do they mean that communication is coming from God? Do they believe it's possible to interpret such light in an incorrect manner? (I still remember all that horrible fish they served in my high school cafeteria because Catholics had this thing about eating meat on Fridays. Then, years later, the Pope says, "Never mind...."

8

Matthew 6:26

by ozbrad in

.

someone posted this on facebook and i found the image and words haunting..

Cold Steel

Man is currently in a state of probation. When he sins there is no immediate justice because it's set aside. Man is given time to repent, collectively. God doesn't rob man of free agency when He destroys a wicked society. He allows man to resist and never destroys a society until its been warned through prophets. Destruction is a consequence, not force. Wickedness leads to suffering, and when the wicked rule people, the people will suffer. Like the child in the poster above, such suffering is most often caused by wickedness.

People may think they know better than God in declaring what they would do or wouldn't do if they were He; however, they aren't God and they don't know what God knows. Even though he's omnipotent, all knowing, He does have limitations. To bring about the Atonement, He was unable to remove the bitter cup from His Son because there was no other way to satisfy the demands of justice. So unless someone knows what God knows, they don't know what they would do in any given situation.

12

Does The WTBTS Use Spies To Find The Rebellious?

by Cold Steel in

some people are outspoken critics of the society even while being part of it.

they may do this because of their families or because they have doubts about their doubts.

have you heard any examples of elders sending people forth to ferret out doubters and people who may spread discontent?

Cold Steel

There would be some problems with the above, I would think.

What if someone's family were not members? Martin converts to the church, but his family wants none of it. So around Christmas, they light the house up and put up a tree. What would the Society do in such a situation? Demand that his family not put up lights, trees, celbrate birthdays and so forth?

And even if the Society could trace Internet activity and by some feat of technology and identifies a link between an "apostate" web site (like this one) and one of their members, would they really reveal their snooping to bag a backslider? I imagine that would be a remarkable story for the news media.

I'm also more than a little astounded that the JWs would discourage higher education. Is it because they think the end is so close that it's a waste of time? Or do they fear education? (I suspect it would be difficult to be the smartest guy in the room if people went out and got themselves educated.) But from what I understand, there's no specific commandment not to pursue higher education, is there? What if someone is already pursuing an education when he joins the Society? Do they just let him continue or is the counseled? And what could they possibly say? Is there anything in print about this absurd stance?

And, again, is it only counsel? They wouldn't take acton against someone, would they? Would it be better or worse if a person was pursuing an advanced degree in, say, ancient scripture? It seems that having some honest to goodness scholars would be a good thing.

28

Book Of Jasher: Nimrod, Terah, Abraham

by *lost* in

found this to be very interesting.. i had been runnning questions around in my head, why did abraham just up sticks and leave everything, just like that ?.

didn't make sense.

too many holes.

Cold Steel

The Book of Jasher has some problems, but it also answers one question I asked my parents as a kid. "How come the people didn't just break into the ark Noah was building when the rain came?" Or, why didn't they break in just to keep Noah from completing work on it?

The Book of Jasher explains that when the animals began to show up, the excess animals took up stations around the ark and kept Noah's enemies at bay. When the rains came, these animals perished too, but they did the Lord's will to the end. (I believe animals have spirits, just like humans, so they went to their reward.)

10

The "lost" disciples...?

by EdenOne in

question:.

1 corinthians 15:4-6 "[jesus] was raised on the third day according to the scriptures, and that he appeared to cephas, and then to the twelve.after that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time".. .

acts 1:15 - "in those days peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty)" .... acts 2:1 - "when the day of pentecost came, they were all together in one place...".

Cold Steel

There's simply a lot we don't know. For example, when Jesus spent 40 days after his resurrection with his disciples teaching them the mysteries, where are the mysteries? In the New Testament canon, we have the fundamentals of the gospel, but none of the "hidden" teachings. What are they? And why did the early Christians sit on them if they knew about these teachings?

Two scholars of ancient scripture posit the following:

Luke states that during the 40-day ministry the Savior spoke “of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God,” but there are only vague hints in other New Testament writings as to the nature and content of these teachings. The preaching of Jesus to the spirits in prison (see 1 Pet. 3:19 and 1 Pet. 4:6) and the doctrine of baptism for the dead (see 1 Cor. 15:29) are two examples of teachings that best fit the context of Acts 1:3. Although few, if any, works pertaining to the 40-day ministry of Acts 1:3 were known a century ago, modern discoveries have produced a virtual library of such writings. Many claim to be authored by such apostles as Peter, John, Philip, Thomas, and James, while others, for example, are simply entitled “The Accounts of the Great Ministry,” “Concerning the Resurrection,” and “Dialogue of the Redeemer .” Many of these documents provide a time reference to the 40-day ministry when they claim to contain teachings of the Living Jesus. In this literature the word “living” is often a technical term that refers to the resurrected and glorified Christ.
There are many difficulties in establishing or refuting the authenticity of such writings. One predicament concerns the varied kinds of doctrinal ideas found in them. In some instances, these ideas either expand or differ from those found in the New Testament writings. But there is no point arguing that the teachings and activities of the risen Jesus must be the same as those of the mortal Jesus, since Luke states that it was after the resurrection that the Savior “opened … their [the disciples’] understanding, that they might understand the scriptures [Old Testament].” (Luke 24:25.) John adds that the resurrected Lord did many marvels that were not recorded in his writings. (John 20:30.)
Another complication centers on the claimed authorship of many of the 40-day documents. The apostles mentioned above would be the very ones by whom such records would predictably be composed, and one must decide whether these texts indeed came from the apostles or were falsely attributed to them.
The observation that many recently found texts date from the third or fourth centuries is itself not conclusive proof against early origins, for almost all extant documents from antiquity come from copies made centuries after the original composition was published. In addition, the majority of these writings contain no allusions or references to any contemporary historical circumstances that would tell us whether they were composed near the time of Jesus or many decades afterward. Since the dating problem persists in the case of almost every apocryphal text, judgment concerning authenticity must be made on other grounds.
A third difficulty arises because these documents were not widely read and circulated. But this circumstance cannot form a decisive argument against their authenticity, for most of them claim to contain secret teachings reserved for a righteous minority within Christianity.

The question of where the people went is most likely due to geography rather than apostasy. The first century Christians were fairly numerous in places. Some fell away when Jesus did not fulfill the role of "Messiah" they were expecting. Instead of killing the Romans, the Romans killed Him! Still, there were many who witnessed Jesus' resurrection and they became stalwarts in expanding the gospel. When it became apparent that the 40-day teachings were not going to be written down for the benefit of the world, many of Christianity's competitors were only too happy to manufacture their own secret teachings.

In the same paper above, the authors conclude:

We are certain that one item of which Jesus spoke during his 40-day visit concerned the disciples’ approaching missions. In the New Testament, Luke records that at the end of the 40 days the resurrected Jesus forbade the disciples to leave Jerusalem for their missions until they had received the Spirit. (See Acts 1:4–5; see also Luke 24:46–49.) Luke then recounts Jesus’ final words to the disciples to the effect that they would be witnesses of the Savior’s resurrection “unto the uttermost part of the earth.” (Acts 1:8; see also Acts 1:22, 2:32.)
The accounts of the Gospel writers agree with this picture. For example, Matthew writes that the risen Jesus met with his disciples for the last time on earth in order to send them to “teach all nations, baptizing them.” (Matt. 28:19.) Mark concurs that Jesus’ final instructions to his disciples included the charge to go “into all the world, and preach.” (Mark 16:15.) According to Luke’s gospel, when the resurrected Lord opened the scriptures to the understanding of his disciples, he told them “repentance and remission of sins should be preached … among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” (Luke 24:47.)

The apostles knew that Jerusalem's destruction was nigh, and by revelation they moved the entire membership of the church to the north, in areas that would be safe when the Romans moved in to surround and take the city. The Jews expected that their Messiah would come and rescue them from the Romans, and they relied on Zechariah 12-14, Ezekiel 38-39 and other scriptures to justify their resistance. Unfortunately, they were wrong.

50

Do You Fear Death?

by Cold Steel in

whether you're a former jw, or active jw, or some other religion, or atheist, what do you say?

do you fear death and, whether yes, no, or i don't know, why?

have changed religious views changed your view of death?

Cold Steel

I don't know why you would make the arrogant and unwarranted assumption that atheists have little or no purpose in life. It's insulting and it's incorrect.

Oh, come on 'keet, what possible purpose can any person have if when they're dead, they're dead? And why should it be insulting? I spent an entire semester with a professor of philosophy quoting the most prolific atheist philosophers throughout history saying that everything man does is for nothing. Camus was the one who said, "The only thing is to decide which is the most aesthetic form of suicide: marriage and a 40-hour-a-week job, or a revolver." He didn't go a day without ridiculing people who believed in religion.

Now, some years later, you say that atheists can have a purpose in life!

Solomon, after marrying heathen wives that led him away from God, wrote the book of Ecclesiastes, one of the most gloomy philosophical works in scripture. Then along came the JWs and turned it into an eschatological work.

If man goes down into the dust never more to rise, it doesn't matter what he does in life, regardless of how good or how evil. Who's going to judge him? Evil and Good become meaningless terms that are completely irrelevant once death closes one's eyes. If you take a life because of revenge or to get gain, who's to say whether you're better or worse than a man who dedicates his life to feeding, clothing and educating his fellow man? Morality is for each person to define, if they care to define it at all.

As long as God sets the bounds of morality, we are subject to His judgment. As long as we have a future, we have a purpose. If man is just at the end of a long evolutionary process, he is a product of evolution and nothing more. Like the old tombstone epitaph:

I Was Not,
I Was,
I Am Not,
I Care Not!

And, as I remember from my childhood:

Have you ever thought when a hearse went by,
That you might be the next to die?
They'll put you in a long hard box,
And cover you with earth and rocks!

There's a lot of humorous cynacism in atheism, but in the end, if you cease to exist, what difference will anything you do here and now make in the grand scheme of things?

12

Does The WTBTS Use Spies To Find The Rebellious?

by Cold Steel in

some people are outspoken critics of the society even while being part of it.

they may do this because of their families or because they have doubts about their doubts.

have you heard any examples of elders sending people forth to ferret out doubters and people who may spread discontent?

Cold Steel

Yes, but are there such spies? And do the elders use the law of witnesses, which require two or more? In other words, can one witness get someone in bad trouble if the accused denies the testimony?

Who would initiate such spying?