Iron Rod

Joined

• started 4 topics
• posted 77 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Iron Rod

• 
  17

  The Universal court case is rigged.........or unwinnable.

  by Iron Rod in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  first let me say that i'm at a point in my life where i don't even buy the idea that the bible is gods word.

  this is just a thought exercise.

  second, since there are so many smart folks on this board, this has possibly already been discussed.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  Thanks for the great responses everyone! I knew there would be some good ones.

  Now, heres something else closely related to consider: Why should there even be a universal court case to start with? Think about it.....Satan,Adam and Eve were supposedly perfect,so when they sinned they should have been executed immediately(since that is supposedly Gods standard...."soul that is sinning,etc...)

  Of course the JW answer is "Well, God couldn't do that.The angels were watching. They might have wondered whether or not Satan was right." Wait a minute...angels? Beings who, as I said before,are superior in every way to us? Beings who shared a close relationship with God for perhaps millenia? Beings who knew better than we ever could that God is "a God of justice,in whom there is no injustice"..? They would have doubted the rightfulness of Gods judgement in destroying the rebels? Does that seem reasonable? In fact, it seems to me that possibly the reason that one-third of the angels defected ( as the story goes)was because they obsered that what Satan said in Eden came true.

  Not to put too fine a point on it,but....We inferior little "grasshoppers" were consigned to suffer,toil and die just to avoid the possibility that some of the angels might have had doubts? Is that sick or is is it just me?
• 
  17

  The Universal court case is rigged.........or unwinnable.

  by Iron Rod in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  first let me say that i'm at a point in my life where i don't even buy the idea that the bible is gods word.

  this is just a thought exercise.

  second, since there are so many smart folks on this board, this has possibly already been discussed.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  First let me say that I'm at a point in my life where I don't even buy the idea that the Bible is Gods word. This is just a thought exercise. Second, since there are so many smart folks on this board, this has possibly already been discussed. (As I'm typing, I'm thinking that it sounds like a subject that Terry might bring up. Thats a complement Terry; you're a deep thinker.) Okay, here goes: JW's(and other fundies)believe that a Supreme Being created the angels(including Satan) then for an undisclosed amount of time part of the universe and somewhere along the line...humans. Science and common sense dictate that there had to be a long time in between the angels creation and that of humans. (Perhaps millenia,it would have taken a long time for the Earth itself to be ready for human habitation) So,God(s) allows Satan, a vastly superior in every way being (a being who,as noted above had thousands of years or more knowledge and experience) to test his new creation (who were comparatively,infants)and of course,they fail. Now....fast forward to now. We,thanks to original sin,are now inferior to Adam,yet we're supposed to face that same vastly superior in every way adversary and his cohorts? That's impossible! At this point the JW's would say "Yes,but we have Jehovah's Spirit to help us." Okay, then this trial is rigged and proves nothing. Remember, Satans challenge was that humans could get along fine without God. He also challenged God to remove the "hedge", or protection, from Job and see if he(and by extension,you could say us) would then turn away from God. So if God is helping us,Satans challenge goes unanswered. If God doesn't help us,we are in a no-win situation. It seems to me that the only way to settle it fairly would be to lock up Satan and the Demons now,so they can't interfere,then give humans a specific length of time to govern their own affairs. What do you guys (and gals) think?
• 
  35

  Would you pay to meet me in person??

  by IP_SEC in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hypothetically

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  No, but I would pay to meet in person any of the gorgeous ladies whose avatars grace this thread.

  BTW- i ccan typpe wwwwwithh oonee hhanddd.
• 
  76

  Bill O'Reilly- Restaurant was nice, ''even though it's run by blacks''

  by nvrgnbk in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  september 26, 2007 by faiz shakir, amanda terkel, satyam khanna, .

  matt corley, ali frick, and jeremy richmond/div> o'reilly surprised restaurant was nice, 'even though it's run by blacks': fox news' bill o'reilly recently dined with the rev.

  al sharpton at sylvia's, a famous african-american-owned restaurant in harlem.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  Sorry, but I just don't see the "out of context" arguement.

  Just to put what I'm about to say in context....I'm a conservative minded person myself, but I can't stand Bill O'Reilly. He comes across as a pompous jerk to me.

  What do you think.....is this another ImusGate?
• 
  60

  Iranian leader's opening rant...sounded like a JW

  by restrangled in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it was a total sermon about their (islam) version of god and how he feels about the entire scientific and academia communities.

  .

  your take on the whole thing?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  Well,barry and kerj2leev, I don't know about you but I am soooo relieved. Steve2 has comforted me immensely! I had no idea that Mr. Amadinijad had promised not to use his nukes when he gets them! WHEW! What a relief.

  HITLER SIGNED A TREATY NOT TO INVADE POLAND, TOO! At least he went to the trouble to lie about it. This nut-job is coming right out and saying that he wants to wipe out Isreal and the U.S. You don't have a problem with that, Steve? I guess you would feel differently if he were promising to obliterate New Zealand.

  As far as your assertion that Iraq was invaded under false pretenses because no WMD's were found,that wasn't the only reason stated for the invasion. Besides,many other countries believed that they were there. Not to mention that the 14 months spent playing footsie with the U.N. provided plenty of time for them to be moved to Saudi Arabia or God knows where. Also, since you are so concerned with the well being of the terrorists at Gitmo, are you aware that they have gained weight since they have been there? They also are provided with prayer rugs and whatever else they need for their worship.Yeah,they're really being tortured. (And no, I'm not proposing that they should be.)

  One thing I do agree with you about is CNN. They really suck. I'm surprised that they even reported what Amadinijad said,for fear of angering him so much that he would refuse to talk to them anymore. That was their viewpoint with Saddam back in the 90's
• 
  34

  If you were a

  by John Doe in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  food, what would you be and why?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  BTW sweetface...you're really making me live up to my name

  But I just can't figure out why you say that PMing you this:

  would be "going too far"
• 
  40

  "In all the congregations let the women keep silent."

  by senoj53 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  at 1 corinthians 14:33-35 paul writes;.

  "in all the congregations let the women keep silent, for it is not permitted for them to speak, but let them be in subjection, even as the law says.".

  if in fulfilment of joel's prophecy god's spirit was poured out on both men and women at pentecost 33 ce giving them the ability to prophesy, why did paul say that women should keep silent?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  Narkissos,Thanks for the clarification!
• 
  60

  Iranian leader's opening rant...sounded like a JW

  by restrangled in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it was a total sermon about their (islam) version of god and how he feels about the entire scientific and academia communities.

  .

  your take on the whole thing?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  AllTimeJeff, I'm glad that we do have some common ground here. I just get really amazed at people who try to draw a moral equivelancy between Bush and people like Hitler or "Mama AhminaJihad." I personally don't agree, however, that Bush invaded the wrong country when he went into Iraq. Saddam was funding terrorists and training them. (Google Salman Pak for example) Since it is a "war on terror" it seems prudent to have taken out Saddam. I agree with you that the Iranian people themselves seem to be trying to embrace Western culture. Also, as you said in a previous post,they aren't responsible for what their leaders are doing. In my first post, I should have said more accurately "The Iranian government is thumbing it's nose...etc." I also wholeheartedly agree that controversial speech should not be shut down. It should rather continue to be protected. I'm sorry if my comments concerning Amajinadad gave that impression. Once he's here, let him have his say. I just didn't think the University should have issued the invitation in the first place. The guy is a known terrorist. He has been for years. Remember the American hostages held in Iran back in the '70's? Amajinadad was one of the principal characters in that mess.

  Anyway,have a good day!

  BTW steve2- I really don't even know where to begin with you. So I will just say this:the reason it's a problem for the Iranian government to thumb it's nose at the world regarding their nuclear program is because they regularly threaten to use said nukes on other countries.
• 
  29

  What are JW beliefs called?

  by RebelWife in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  catholics/catholicism.

  jehovah's witnesses/jehovah's witnessism?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  If you really want to tweak him, start using the term "Rutherfordism". Or perhaps "Franzism."

  I like the term "Drivel." (Religious Gymnastics,maybe?)

  Although I must say that sweetface has a good one,too!
• 
  40

  How Would You Do in a Debate Against a Talented JW Apologist?

  by Open mind in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  how good of a debater are you?.

  i was recently reading some old threads on jwd back in the days when a poster named "youknow" was here.

  (2002) he would stand toe-to-toe (or at least he thought he did) with the likes of alanf, refiners fire, seven006, and many others.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Iron Rod

  Amen, Terry and hillary_step

  That is exactly why the Society doesn't want its members to do real Bible study. If they do, some will begin to see all the discrepancies in the Bible. ( I like the way you phrased it Terry..."cobbled together" )

  The Watchtower ( and other fundies ) have always said that the ancient manuscripts are so consistent that this has to be Gods word. Not true! There are literally hundreds of thousands of variations in the extant manuscripts.

  Take away the foundation point and the house (or inverted pyramid) falls.

  However, to answer the original question, I personally wouldn't do real well in a one-on-one debate. I just don't think fast on my feet. My brain freezes up. My wife,on the other hand, can be wrong (and know she's wrong) and still debate the point fabulously. So yeah, I wholeheartedly agree with the point some made earlier. The person who "wins" the debate isn't necessarily always right.