AllTimeJeff

Joined

• started 234 topics
• posted 6,022 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by AllTimeJeff

• 
  15

  Does the GB keep a list of all members of 144 000, alive and dead?

  by african GB Member in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i've always wondered how they keep track of all members,.

  like keeping a list and then scratching off those who pass away.. for example:.

  bro minimus.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Gayle, there is a list, and they do it for their own posterity. When they use the phrase "genuine annointed", its due to their own approved list.
• 
  30

  FRAUD at the proper time: Watchtower swindle and GB nonsense

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  food at the proper time?

  there is a huge difference between an opinion and a false teaching.. what if it could be unambiguously demonstrated that a teaching is not merely opinion but a false religious view passed off as absolute truth in the name of a higher authority?.

  would that not be fraud?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  There is a huge difference between an opinion and a false teaching.

  Here is a potential opportunity for theists and atheists/agnostics to "get along".

  It's simple really. Everyone, even Perry, is obviously allowed their personal beliefs. They are entitled to their opinions and freedom to worship. (and the opposite being true, atheists do not have to worship or to have religious precepts forced upon them as the law of the land)

  We on this board do well to realize that people likely aren't going to change their stripes too much. The best that can be hoped for is a bit of honesty. An example statement would be

  Theist: "Yes, I believe in an invisible being, I worship him and it adds great meaning in my life. I do not have answers to all logical questions for my beliefs, but choose to worship still thanks to my faith. I wouldn't expect others to believe as I do unless they were so inclined, and I understand the reasons why." (I guess the understanding part would be the rub there wouldn't it?)

  Atheist: "I see no evidence of God as he is presented traditionally. I allow that most of the world does believe in a supernatural power, and I respect their right to believe this. As I ask logical and reasonable questions and do not get the answers to satisfy the logic, I am content to allow others their opinions, even as we continue to discuss the matter from various points of view."

  Atheists do not teach doctrine. They merely point out the obvious.

  It would be helpful for some theists to do the same.

  For the record, I am rather empathetic to theists on this one. I think at this point in human evolution, most of us need some kind of personal belief system that gives meaning and purpose to life. The challenge is to realize that your personal beliefs, which are at their core, your opinions, are not proveable by any known measure, esp when compared to the hundreds of thousands of competing belief systems that exist on planet Earth at this moment.

  Such simple math (i.e. the sheer amount of belief systems) should humble the most ardent theist. Believe as you will, but don't argue to strongly for what at best can be argued to a draw, due to the same amount of evidence that is in existence for all belief systems in the world.

  (re read my last sentence a couple of times, it makes sense. Trust me. )
• 
  16

  "Woe for the Earth and for the Sea!"

  by wannabe in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "woe for the earth and for the sea!".

  he has made known the end from the beginning, and what is still to come; as well, assures us all there, that his purpose will stand, and he will do all that he pleases.. .

  "{jeremiah 25:31-36 niv}.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  So I guess you disagree with JW teachings?
• 
  32

  What's in it for the Governing Body?

  by dissed in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  for many jw's, they point to the gb as wonderful examples of zealous, humble, older men that are only serving jg for right and correct reasons.. unlike many of the preachers we see on tv, they are, and this is the important point, 'not in it for the money'.. of course we see them differently on this site, exposed many times over, as being self-serving hypocrites.. but if you want to win-over a jw doubter, this is one of the questions you have to answer.

  "what's in it for the gb member?

  why are they doing this if not for the money?".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Being a religious leader, even in Western democracies, is like having a never ending expense account.

  No, they don't have salaries. But I think that anyone who has spent anytime with the GB knows that they don't live poorly. They have many material possessions, and don't pay for travel.

  But while they get to go home to comfort, I don't think they do their GB thing for $$. They do it for the kick of power. It is a real 'delusion of grandeur' situation. They are literally deluded.
• 
  15

  Does the GB keep a list of all members of 144 000, alive and dead?

  by african GB Member in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i've always wondered how they keep track of all members,.

  like keeping a list and then scratching off those who pass away.. for example:.

  bro minimus.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Yes, they do. It's not that big of a secret.
• 
  97

  The JEHOVAH game (a modern fetish)

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1.we use a name to distinguish one entity from another to avoid confusion.. 2.if there is only one of something it is one of a kind.

  elivis is elvis and those who pretend to be him are impersonators.

  those who pretend to be jesus are false or pseudo-christs.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Perry, my response I hope will not be construed by you as "piling on." If it is, I apologize. But I wish to make a point here, as you and I have debated very passionately some topics in the past.

  Terry makes a great point, and the greatest point, one that I probably should have argued is this very simple statement.

  The proper ending to a debate is that somebody admist their premise or conclusion was faulty. Have you ever been wrong about anything? I have. It isn't pleasant to be wrong, but, it certainly brings an opportunity to grow wiser.

  As you continue to argue and debate for your theistic positions, this is the crux of the matter. Surely you realize that even among Christians and theists, there are those who disagree with you. And you can't be both right.

  To be wrong is an opportunity to go forward with greater knowledge, facts, as well as an opportunity to associate and learn from people who believe differently and disagree with you.

  Now, there is a big difference between what is right for you and what is factual and truthful. These are called personal beliefs.

  Personal beliefs naturally have a measure of right or wrong, fact and fiction, what can be proven and what can absolutely not be proven.

  Your insistence on arguing for what cannot be proven is one thing. Your persistence in maintaining things that aren't factual (example: Terry's questions on the bible that you didn't respond to) demonstratably show that you are not being intellectually honest.

  Now let me be clear, I respect and honor your right to hold and discuss your personal beliefs. That is not the issue.

  What is the issue is that in these discussions, you do not even allow for the possibility that you are wrong, and that other paths are correct. You won't even acknowledge that there are demonstratable weakness, logical and factual, with your personal beliefs.

  If you are going to argue for your beliefs, then you must be prepared to "bring it". Like evidence. Like reasonableness. Like intellectual honesty.

  It is your patent lack of evidence, reasonableness, and intellectual honesty that draw me to discussions that involve you arguing your position. I am not talking about your faith or personal beliefs. What I am talking about is how your faith and personal beliefs cause you to act so disrespectfully to others who believe (with excellent reasons) differently then you do.

  Perry, I don't mean this to be condescending, but I feel sorry for you that your faith divides you from people and that your faith causes you to be so willing to ignore clear facts regarding your arguments.

  To Terry's point, being wrong is not a bad thing, unless the certitude that comes from being a JW or other fundamentalist religions is something you can't live without. Certainty is dangerous though Perry, and for that reason, I fear for you.
• 
  49

  interesting email circulating amongst witnesses: gubberning body says preaching reason is..................

  by DaCheech in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  enjoy these remarks, friends.

  and, as always, if you have received this from another source, please just delete, forgive me and move on!

  saturday, january 9, 2010, 8:22 am .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Something else about preaching and how we are still awaiting Armageddon...

  If Jehovah really cared about me, he would have started Armageddon before apostates got to me. But he didn't. He strung me along.

  Or the other alternative of course, is that Jehovah, like the Governing Body, is a total sham. I bet that is the correct answer....
• 
  97

  The JEHOVAH game (a modern fetish)

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1.we use a name to distinguish one entity from another to avoid confusion.. 2.if there is only one of something it is one of a kind.

  elivis is elvis and those who pretend to be him are impersonators.

  those who pretend to be jesus are false or pseudo-christs.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Are you wiling to state categorically that no accretions of a false nature have crept into the text?

  Are you willing to state categorically that we have the ACTUAL VERBATIM text of the original uncorrupt autographs?

  Arguments over "meaning" begin with texts. Do they not?

  Oops, forgot to answer these didn't you Perry?
• 
  49

  interesting email circulating amongst witnesses: gubberning body says preaching reason is..................

  by DaCheech in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  enjoy these remarks, friends.

  and, as always, if you have received this from another source, please just delete, forgive me and move on!

  saturday, january 9, 2010, 8:22 am .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  JW's are changing before our eyes.

  In decades past, you couldn't be a CO or a missionary unless you helped bring at least one person to the point of baptism. It used to be that the preaching work WAS about saving lives.

  Now, it has taken the place of giving a cow to your local Levitical priest to sacrifice to Jehovah.

  As already alluded to, there is a VERY pragmatic reason for the GB to frame the preaching work this way; its because the door to door work is an activity with diminishing returns.

  So now they must condition their flock to view preaching as a way to show Jehovah how much they care. And you know how Jehovah shows he cares? He doesn't bring Armageddon so that you can REALLY show how much you care.

  Because it at least made a little sense that Armageddon was being delayed so that some "right hearted"™ ones could respond to the preaching.

  So it seems pretty clear that fewer and fewer are responding, and

  It seems pretty clear that JW's have covered the entire earth with their witness, so long as you don't count a couple billion Chinese and Muslim's on two continents, and

  It's just about time for Armageddon, except

  Jehovah now wants to see how much you REALLY care and love him, by preaching to people who have already made up their minds.

  This is real, unadulterated groping in the dark by the GB.
• 
  69

  Jehovah's Witnesses and Calvinistic Predestination

  by AllTimeJeff in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this is a complex question, and i just want to get a discussion started on the message of jehovah's witnesses and how it relates to their adventist roots, and esp calvinism.. bear with me, i will try to be concise.. we all know that while jehovah's witnesses like to deny adventist roots, that it is clear that according to them, the man jesus selected to get the whole thing started, c t russell, was heavily influenced by adventist ideas, esp the (adventist) idea that has really never left them; the idea that somehow, a time date or period can be inferred from the bible if you read certain scriptures through an adventist lens.

  (thus, the 2520 years, 7 gentile times, etc.).

  so while this is relatively well known, there is a concept that jehovah's witnesses teach against, yet practice.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Hi there. I would like to clarify myself, knowing as we do now that we have a Calvinist here to properly represent the religion. It is clear that my efforts at comparing an idea that JW's don't teach, but in my opinion practice in an ironic way with my rudimentary understanding of Calvinism was probably not the best way to broach the subject.

  And I appreciate learning more then I did regarding Arminianism and Calvinism.

  So, while this was just an observation of JW's, (a religion I know well) it wasn't meant to be a commentary on Calvinism (a religion I obviously am not familiar with.)

  XJW4EVR, thanks for your input. While you are free to charecterize your religion as you wish, I would also remind anyone reading this that JW's claim to be a Christian religion, and most Christians don't believe that this is so, because they don't worship Jesus. JW's insist that they do, and that they also have keep their rights to define their religion as they so choose. Many disagree with them.

  So while I have no doubt that my comparison of Calvinism and JWism regarding predestination was a bit of a stretch (admittedly so), I still seem to think that Calvins believe or teach in some kind of "predestination". Here is Wiki's opening salvo

  Calvinism (also called the Reformed tradition, the Reformed faith, or Reformed theology) is a theological system and an approach to the Christian life. [1] The Reformed tradition was advanced by several theologians such as Martin Bucer, Heinrich Bullinger, Peter Martyr Vermigli, and Huldrych Zwingli, but it often bears the name of the French reformerJohn Calvin because of his prominent influence on it and because of his role in the confessional and ecclesiastical debates throughout the 16th century. Today, this term also refers to the doctrines and practices of the Reformed churches of which Calvin was an early leader. Less commonly, it can refer to the individual teaching of Calvin himself. [2] The system is best known for its doctrines of predestination and total depravity, stressing the absolute sovereignty of God.

  Just curious, so that I may understand you. Thanks.