Posts by ANewLeif

58

How do JWs explain John 20:28?

by Zico in

much is made of john 1:1 in trinitarian discussions and there's a lot of debate over how it should be correctly translated, depending on your particular bias on the jesus god issue, but surely there is no scripture more clear that jesus is god than the one where thomas directly calls him god in john 20:28?

27next he said to thomas: put your finger here, and see my hands, and take your hand and stick it into my side, and stop being unbelieving but become believing.28in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

how do jehovah's witnesses deal with this scripture?

ANewLeif

Polytheism is belief in more than one God. Whether or not JWs believe Thomas was referring to Jesus, they believe John 1:1 calls Jesus a God and that Isaiah 9:6 depicts Jesus as having the title "Mighty God." They also believe that Psalms refers to the angels as gods.

JWs are polytheistic and try to make themselves appear monotheistic. Their doctrine is inconsistent with monotheism and can only be explained as polytheism. They try to combine the beliefs of the ancient Israelites with the beliefs of First Century Jews and Christians as though these were identical. The sets of belief aren't identical; they don't combine very well at all. Combining them leads inexorably to polytheism.

ANL

34

Please "Study" With Jehovah's Witnesses, I beg you!

by AK - Jeff in

if you are a former jw, or just one who is interested enough in the cult to spend time here on jwd, i emplore you to accept a 'bible study' with jehovah's witnesses when they next call and offer.

by so doing, and having of course a full knowledge of the doctrines and practices they employ, you have a special opportunity!

you can use the study for the following;.

ANewLeif

I could do this. The only people who know I had any connection to JWs is the one guy I work with at this school. He is out but his wife is still in.

Should I ask him how to go about it?

ANL

47

Gore is no expert....

by Bryan in

jw
friends

a staunch critic of the climate change debate says al gore's oscar for his film an inconvenient truth makes a mockery of the awards.. http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/1005652.

a top hurricane forecaster called al gore "a gross alarmist" friday for making an oscar-winning documentary about global warming.. .

"he's one of these guys that preaches the end of the world type of things.

ANewLeif

As far as we know we are the only species that would "notice" (in the sense of being cognizant of) the extermination of any species, or the rise in water levels, or any of the other projected effects of climate change. From that perspective we are the only species interested in the ecology of earth at all so, by definition, we are the only ones this issue is "of interest to."

dilaceratus asked, "As far as the broader effects, do you suspect that drastic climate change would be something akin to the loss of television, of interest only to one particular, self-selecting group?" He might have meant it rhetorically, but I answered his question. The answer is an unequivocal yes.

"Maslow" was a response to dilaceratus' comment about letting the species continue along with its Maslow list. I used his comment to inject that this supposed act of altruism (a self-actualized effort) is actually nothing more than a response to a special safety need.

Dilaceratus' comments about word usage didn't really merit response, in my opinion, since there is no endpoint to such a discussion other than some variety of "All definitions are ultimately ambiguous." It would also be an off-topic conversation.

ANL

47

Gore is no expert....

by Bryan in

jw
friends

a staunch critic of the climate change debate says al gore's oscar for his film an inconvenient truth makes a mockery of the awards.. http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/1005652.

a top hurricane forecaster called al gore "a gross alarmist" friday for making an oscar-winning documentary about global warming.. .

"he's one of these guys that preaches the end of the world type of things.

ANewLeif

I apologize for referring to Venus as a gas giant. I do not think correcting errors in statement is pedantry. I would rather be corrected.

By describing the efforts toward reduction of greenhouse gas emissions as an attempt to save the environment and to save the earth I believe scientists (and governments and documentarians) overstate their objective to lend an air of more nobility to the cause than is scientifically justifiable. Humans are generally in it for humans, plain and simple. I am not moralizing that fact. I'm just stating it.

On Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs altruism is somewhat above where this safety effort genuinely falls. The fact that so many people are pretending otherwise causes an unsettled response in me.

ANL

47

Gore is no expert....

by Bryan in

jw
friends

a staunch critic of the climate change debate says al gore's oscar for his film an inconvenient truth makes a mockery of the awards.. http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/1005652.

a top hurricane forecaster called al gore "a gross alarmist" friday for making an oscar-winning documentary about global warming.. .

"he's one of these guys that preaches the end of the world type of things.

ANewLeif

I only state that the exercise is explained as an attempt to save the environment and to save the earth while the fact is the exercise is for the salvation of our species. Whether or not this self-interest is species-specific, as far as I know pretending that the actual objective is something other than special survival is unique to humanity. I am unaware of any other species developing the ability of self-deceit. This degree of sophistication is unique to humans.

That tens of thousands of scientists can agree to anything related to this issue in significant numbers may indicate they are humans first and scientists second.

ANL

58

How do JWs explain John 20:28?

by Zico in

much is made of john 1:1 in trinitarian discussions and there's a lot of debate over how it should be correctly translated, depending on your particular bias on the jesus god issue, but surely there is no scripture more clear that jesus is god than the one where thomas directly calls him god in john 20:28?

27next he said to thomas: put your finger here, and see my hands, and take your hand and stick it into my side, and stop being unbelieving but become believing.28in answer thomas said to him: my lord and my god!

how do jehovah's witnesses deal with this scripture?

ANewLeif

I am at least a polytheist. I may be an omnitheist. I am not a Trinitarian. I see nothing in the NT that says Christians believed the Israelites were correct about the nature of deity, but a lot to suggest Christians believed the Israelites incorrect about the nature of deity.

Ultimately, the Catholic church decided what was and was not canonical and attempted to eradicate as heretical whatever they did not approve. There was extreme bias applied to the canonization of Scripture. Decisions were heavily influenced by politics and the doctrines held by the most powerful people in the Catholic church. God did not protect the text from corruption which leads to three possible conclusions. Either God doesn't think the NT as it currently exists needs to be free from all error in order to convey spiritual truths, or God didn't protect it due to some reason we can't comprehend, or God doesn't exist.

ANL

51

"NWT emerges as the most accurate of the translations compared..." ???

by whereami in

this is for all you scholars out there.

is this acurate?

please show examples were the nwt is clearly wrong.. .

ANewLeif

I have a friend here where I work who was a Jehovah's Witness for more than 20 years. When he explained how they put the name Jehovah into the New Testament over 200 times and then used translations of Greek into Hebrew to justify what they did, it blew my mind. How could anyone believe that kind of a translation had any integrity?

I was raised around JWs, but I didn't know that they were as crazy as they are until I met this guy.

ANL

47

Gore is no expert....

by Bryan in

jw
friends

a staunch critic of the climate change debate says al gore's oscar for his film an inconvenient truth makes a mockery of the awards.. http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/1005652.

a top hurricane forecaster called al gore "a gross alarmist" friday for making an oscar-winning documentary about global warming.. .

"he's one of these guys that preaches the end of the world type of things.

ANewLeif

I do not believe humans can turn Earth into a gas giant. We will kill ourselves before we damage the planet beyond its ability to self-correct and continue to sustain life.

It is not the earth we are protecting, it is not the wildlife, it is humans. Claiming that CO2 is a pollutant is strange when we know CO2 will not damage the earth. Claiming to protect the earth by reducing CO2 is strange. Claiming that protecting our coastal cities is somehow good for the earth is strange. Claiming that protection of a clear overpopulation of the human species is good for the earth is strange. CO2 is not a pollutant just because it is not conducive to long-term perpetuation of current human enterprise.

ANL

47

Gore is no expert....

by Bryan in

jw
friends

a staunch critic of the climate change debate says al gore's oscar for his film an inconvenient truth makes a mockery of the awards.. http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/1005652.

a top hurricane forecaster called al gore "a gross alarmist" friday for making an oscar-winning documentary about global warming.. .

"he's one of these guys that preaches the end of the world type of things.

ANewLeif

My understanding was that CO left an electron deficit on the carbon side of the equation, according to Valence Bond notation. Which is why CO bonds to Fe in hemoglobin, forming a much stronger bond with the hemoglobin than hemoglobin creates with oxygen. The bond is roughly 200 times as strong, if memory serves.

I was not aware that CO is classed as a free radical.

ANL

47

Gore is no expert....

by Bryan in

jw
friends

a staunch critic of the climate change debate says al gore's oscar for his film an inconvenient truth makes a mockery of the awards.. http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/1005652.

a top hurricane forecaster called al gore "a gross alarmist" friday for making an oscar-winning documentary about global warming.. .

"he's one of these guys that preaches the end of the world type of things.

ANewLeif

Many carbon-based life forms take in air and expel carbon dioxide: CO2. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Many plants thrive in a CO2 rich atmosphere. Thriving plant life typically leads to larger specimen of herbivores and omnivores, which typically leads to larger specimen of herbivore eaters.

Vegetation "inhales" CO2 and "exhales" oxygen: O. Vegetation includes grass, trees, cyanophyta algae, etc. Larger animals can be supported more easily in an atmosphere richer in oxygen.

Cars "inhale" air and fuel, burn the fuel, and exhale carbon monoxide: CO. This gas can kill air breathers if its concentrations become to high.

Humans are very unlikely to kill the planet. Humans are statistically likely to exterminate humanity, the planet will be just fine.

ANL