Please CT, did you need to post that picture? Now I'll be thinking of "gosh-golly-wink-wink-he palls around with terrorists" and won't be able to get to sleep.
Posts by Gopher
-
68OBAMA WINS NOBEL PEACE PRIZE
by WuzLovesDubs inhe couldnt bring the olympics to chicago but he accomplished this coveted award after only a few months in office.
somebody out there sees this man as doing what the planet needs.
perhaps.. but i for one am not as shocked as most.
-
-
-
30
How many XJWs went onto another faith....?
by 2pink ini'm just curious here.. as i am exiting currently and trying to find my new place (and belief system) in this world, i am wondering what the experience was like for other xjws.
did you go onto a new faith?
i'd love to read your responses.
-
-
Gopher
2Pink, I see curiosity about other religions as a point in one's journey out from the JW's. I did examine some religions, as my sister goes to a church and seems happy.
What I decided (for me) is that religion seems to be about a person (or a body of people) telling you what THEIR opinion is about God and what you're supposed to do about it (.... or else???).
After a while, listening to them reminded me of the style (but not the content) of the JW leaders. I had been preached to enough, and also had done enough preaching/witnessing, to last several lifetimes. I don't need it any more.
-
68
OBAMA WINS NOBEL PEACE PRIZE
by WuzLovesDubs inhe couldnt bring the olympics to chicago but he accomplished this coveted award after only a few months in office.
somebody out there sees this man as doing what the planet needs.
perhaps.. but i for one am not as shocked as most.
-
-
Gopher
So Obama hasn't accomplished his broad goals yet, and this disqualifies him according to the "anything Obama does is wrong" bunch.
So let's examine some past winners and see if you can spot a pattern.
Desmond Tutu, 1984 -- for his work against apartheid. HEY WAIT -- Apartheid didn't end for 10 more years. Dude hadn't done anything yet. Maybe the Nobel committee should have waited until apartheid was completely dismantled, THEN considered Tutu. But that's not how the Nobels are awarded.
Lech Walesa, 1983 - founder of Solidarity, for his campaign for human rights. Hey wait -- the Communists in Poland stayed in power through the late 1980's. Dude hadn't really accomplished anything yet. They should have waited to see how his human rights campaign worked out, then considered walesa. But that's not how the Nobels are awarded.
Jimmy Carter 2002, for his efforts to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts like the Middle East situation. Hey wait, there's still trouble in the Middle East. Carter didn't bring a lasting peace. The should have waited until Carter's efforts really were proven to have paid off. But that's not how the Nobels are awarded.
Carl Von Ossietzky, 1935 - German journalist and pacificist, for raising awareness of the dangers of the Nazi regime. But wait, the Nazis were in power for 10 more years. The Nobel prize committee had no idea how this Nazi thing was going to work out, and whether Ossietzky's contributions were worth anything. They should have just waited. But that's not how the Nobels are awarded.
Woodrow Wilson, 1919 - president of the USA, founder of the League of Nations. But wait, the League of Nations didn't prevent another world war or bring lasting peace to mankind. The Nobel prize committee should have just waited. But that's not how the Nobels are awarded.
Does ANYONE see a pattern here? The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded for great efforts to sow seeds of peace. They don't wait for decades to see if it sprouts exactly as hoped. In some cases it does, in other cases (like Wilson's) it doesn't.
Obama has apparently impressed many nations of the world as one who has taken great efforts to lead the world towards better solutions for its conflicts, and this award says they want him to continue. Nothing more, nothing less.
-
52
Comments from an elder judt returning from Elders' School
by Room 215 ina good friend and long-time elder just back from patterson, asked me what i thought is he most prevalent problem elders are facing today....told him i had no idea.... he said "pornography" by far the most vexing problem for them... hard to believe, no?.
-
-
Gopher
Maybe what vexes the WTS leaders is that so many JW men are getting CAUGHT, thus reducing the number of "qualified" men they can exploit.
The JW's who can keep their secrets well-hidden are the ones who can get ahead.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Gopher
Something for PJSChipper:
-
-
-
-
34
Any Cat Stevens fans out there?
by beksbks inyea, me neither.
there is some new oft played commercial that has that song that grates on my nerves.
grrr!.
-
-
Gopher
I used to play "Morning Has Broken" on the piano, and really liked that song. Someone posted "Peace Train" above, I also liked "Wild World".
He is a skilled musician, but I know Yusaf Islam is not everyone's cup of tea.
That having been said, I am sick to death of hearing "If You Want to Sing out Sing Out" already.
-
21
Worship only counts if you base it on faith, not proof of god's existance?
by AdaMakawee ini was reading an article online, about the upcoming vatican ruling on a shrine in the balkins.
the shrine is built in a place where people say the virgin mary has been appearing, and people have been going there in the hundreds of thousands sort of like the lourdes thing.
after the article, which supposes that the pope will rule that this is all from satan and meant to lead people away from the church, there were comments from people regarding the phenomena, the expected ruling, etc.
-
-
Gopher
Narkissos,
I was concentrating more on the last part of the thread's title - "proof of God's existence". Maybe the controversy over God's existence wasn't a big issue in Bible times, although it seems Psalms 14 does take a poke at atheists when it says the fool has said in his heart there is no God. Maybe this is referring to "practical atheism", a term I heard when I was a JW. That term was intended to describe someone who may believe God exists but practically does nothing about it. (I don't know if that term has any currency outside of the world of JW's.)
In his dissertation in Hebrews 11, verse 6, Paul defined faith as having two elements - (1) believing that God exists and (2) believing that he rewards those who seek him. Since he wrote that part about "you must believe he exists" -- maybe it really was an issue in the first century. He was writing to people in the religious hotbed of Jerusalem, and still he had to remind them about that mental acknowledgement "God exists".
James adds that faith must be accompanied by works or else it is false. This is where it gets confusing, and comes to the point about rituals that you raised as central to religious practice. A person could do works or rituals and look "faithful" while really not taking God into consideration. Coming from a works-based religion like the JW's, I saw a lot of people going through the motions, and even felt that way myself a lot of the time. Does religious faithfulness really imply the kind of faith the Paul described in Hebrews 11:6? Does religious practice mean one is worshipping God?
It gets confusing because different religious teachers tell you differently, perhaps based on what they want you to believe, and even in the Bible there is the Paul vs. James approach to the subject.
So to clarify it in my mind, I simplify it by saying one who believes in an invisible, unprovable character like a God has faith. But they may not meet the requirements of faithfulness outlined in the bylaws of any religion.
Help me out here if you can. (I know it's the middle of the night in France, but I'll be interested in any thoughts you may have tomorrow.)
-
21
Worship only counts if you base it on faith, not proof of god's existance?
by AdaMakawee ini was reading an article online, about the upcoming vatican ruling on a shrine in the balkins.
the shrine is built in a place where people say the virgin mary has been appearing, and people have been going there in the hundreds of thousands sort of like the lourdes thing.
after the article, which supposes that the pope will rule that this is all from satan and meant to lead people away from the church, there were comments from people regarding the phenomena, the expected ruling, etc.
-
-
Gopher
Psacramento,
The point you bring up is controversial. I stand by my statement that there is a clear line between facts and faith.
If something is factual (such as water flows downhill into the sea or ocean), you do not need faith. Even though you may have never personally visited a delta where the river empties it waters, you KNOW it's a fact. But if someone tells you it will rain tomorrow, that takes faith.
