Bradley,
I cannot see how it is possible for one to be a Christian in expectation of the Lord's Return and involved in warfare at the same time.
I think a Christian should keep all their options open because nothing is impossible with God.
Sabrina
Greenpalmtreestillmine
JoinedPosts by Greenpalmtreestillmine
-
29
Neutrality of the WT
by blindfool inone of the issues i have with the wt teachings is that it is taught that a true believer must not engage in warfare.. the problem is: evil does exist and someone must be willing to stop evil.
if not good people then who will?.
many years ago, i asked a sister this question: "if no one had stopped hitler (the best example of evil at the time) what would have happened?
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
-
29
Neutrality of the WT
by blindfool inone of the issues i have with the wt teachings is that it is taught that a true believer must not engage in warfare.. the problem is: evil does exist and someone must be willing to stop evil.
if not good people then who will?.
many years ago, i asked a sister this question: "if no one had stopped hitler (the best example of evil at the time) what would have happened?
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
Hi Blindfool,
Should a Christian not be willing to defend what is good?
Of course. But if I may, I'll play Pilate a little and ask, "What is good?" If a murderer enters my home and I kill him to protect my children that may be good but if I give my free will to another and he tells me to not only kill the potential murderer but also every member of his family by bombing his house then personally I may not think that's good. But someone else may feel differently about it believing that the end, winning a war, justifies the means, bombing cities, and sometimes it does. Another thing some may consider is while there may be just wars no war is without unjust acts because no military is without unjust people. Rape, torture and other inhumane crimes are committed by the best of armies in the most just of wars, it can't be avoided. So in the military a good person is between a rock and a hard place I think.
War is inevitable and I agree sometimes even necessary. Why even the book of Revelation recognizes that.
I agree with Joyzabel, it is an individual conscience decision. imo
Sabrina
-
45
Cross or torture stake.....
by snakeizz inthis has always puzzled me.....can anyone shed some light as to what it really was?
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
The Watchtower prefers to continually strain out the gnat and swallow the camel. On the one hand they studiously exclude all self-proclaimed worldly impurities hoping to attain righteousness but then they leave the inside of their congregational cup filthy. They proclaim "Stake Not Cross!" while at the same time allowing child molestors among them to continue on their sick path. Jesus would have condemned the Governing Body as hypocrites and liars and defamers of God!
As for cross or torture stake, I really don't think it's that important. The Christ died whether it was a cross or stake he died.
Sabrina
-
39
Do you still Pray?
by Dustin insince i stopped being a jw i haven't prayed.
so the other day i went to supper at my parent's house who are still jw's, and they prayed before we ate.
it was a very strange feeling, and it stirred up alot of weird feelings.
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
Hi Dustin,
The JWs made prayer a stilted kind of thing with all their requirements, you know the use of the name Jehovah in all our prayers, the always saying at the end "in Jesus name", not encouraging us to simply speak to God like we would a friend but instead as if he is on a throne far away. That kind of prayer is not how to get close to God. In fact it really removes us from God. Prayer should be spontaneous and informal. It does not need to be something done at night or in the morning, nor does it need a place or time. Prayer can be just a personal thought or passing glance at God, a rememberance of him without words. Sometimes just the request for faith expressed by just saying, "God help me to have faith" is just what we need. No formalism, no anything, just a few words. Put out of your mind the JW prayer and reach out in your own personal way even in just a thought.
I wish you peace and happiness, Dustin.
Sabrina
-
42
jw takes blood over plasma in b.c.
by orbison11 inthis is an interesting read.
recently, in my same small city, chiliwack, b.c.
a court case was thrown out re a woman who died from complications during birth.
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
Hi MySuperSecret,
Sry I dont know why that posted so many times, my computer lagged real bad then did some funy things...I guess.
And here I thought it was "repetition for emphasis".
By the way, WELCOME TO THE BOARD!
Sabrina
-
42
jw takes blood over plasma in b.c.
by orbison11 inthis is an interesting read.
recently, in my same small city, chiliwack, b.c.
a court case was thrown out re a woman who died from complications during birth.
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
Hi SixofNine,
I recognize what you're saying but the risk issue is really like the flavoring in children's aspirin. It makes the medicine a little more palatable but it is not the reason for taking the medicine. I believe most JWs are well aware that the reason they do not take transfusions is because they believe the Bible forbids it. The risk factor is promoted as a bonus and even as a basis for faith in God's word but in the end the prohibition on blood is Biblical. It stands or falls on scripture not on risk. The blood transfusion doctrine is an extension of the Bible's prohibition on eating blood, a practice that is not all that risky yet strictly avoided by many JWs because it is based on scripture.
But maybe I'm wrong, maybe most JWs don't know what and why they believe what they do.
Sabrina
-
42
jw takes blood over plasma in b.c.
by orbison11 inthis is an interesting read.
recently, in my same small city, chiliwack, b.c.
a court case was thrown out re a woman who died from complications during birth.
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
MySuperSecret,
I agree with you. Blood transfusions are a risk. They are also overly used and not always, as some have claimed, only used to save a life about to be lost. Blood transfusions are a medical procedure and as with almost all medical procedures and/or choices they have their risks. No one should take a blood transfusion unless it is a life and death matter, imo.
But Jehovah's Witnesses do not avoid blood because of risk do they? JWs do not take blood transfusions because in their opinion the Bible forbids it. So the discussion on the safety of blood transfusions is a moot one since even if blood transfusions were as safe as drinking a glass of water, JWs would still not take transfusions. Right?
Since the safety of blood transfusions has really nothing to do with the existence of the JW blood doctrine the only way to prove the rightness of that doctrine is by proving it is based on sound scripture and soundness of mind. All the stats in the world showing the risks of transfusions mean nothing since we all take many risks almost everyday of our lives. It is not risk that matters it's what you believe God requires isn't that so?
Sabrina
-
40
for those who listen to Christian music....
by missy04 inwhat are your favorite songs??.
i love "shout to the lord" .
and "i believe in god.
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
Good music draws us nearer to God. I think it helps the heart to deal with the hurts and sorrows by opening the door to the joy of God's love.
A particular favorite for me this past week has been: Garments of Praise from the Revival in Belfast album.
So good to find this thread this morning.
Love to you all,
Sabrina
-
61
Should the Christian faith be rationally defended?
by Narkissos inin the pretty miscellaneous "global flood" thread there were a couple of exchanges on the value of "apologetics" per se.
i think this subject is worth a thread of its own.
i will here recall some statements in the aforementioned thread:.
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
Narkissos,
Teleology; I had to look that one up.
Thanks for the comment on my post, Narkissos. I appreciated it very much.
Have a Happy New Year!
Sabrina
-
11
Faiths Ask of Quake: 'Why Did You Do This, God?'
by homme perdu inby peter graff
london (reuters) -
it is one of the oldest, most profound questions, posed by some of the most learned minds of every faith throughout the course of human history.
-
-
Greenpalmtreestillmine
Hi Undercover,
So he either doesn't exist or he doesn't care.
People do not starve today because there isn't enough food on earth. They don't die in earthquakes because we don't have the technology to build earthquake resistant buildings. They don't die in great numbers from Tsunamis because we do not have warning systems. Children in poor countries don't die because there are no vaccines in the world to help them and no way to remove the bacteria in their drinking water. Malaria is still a great killer, is this because we do not have the science that can help these people?
We could go on and on enumerating the failure of man to help man. We give ourselves all kinds of reasons for it, but the fact remains that from an extra-terrestial point of view it could easily be concluded that man does not help man because not enough people care enough.
I don't think God put us here for us to live like toddlers always depending on Daddy to prevent all bad things all the time. Gosh, we don't even do that for our own kids! When the time comes (and I know it sounds crazy to most here but that's what I believe) God will intervene in man's affairs and do so decisively and openly. In the mean time maybe it's like that Christmas song about Santa checking his list and checking it twice to see who's been naughty or nice. I know....very simplistic but sometimes the simply things have more truth in them than the so called deep things in life.
Happy New Year to you!
Sabrina