Posts by Caljuher

49

Premonitions and Prayer - Explained!

by Seeker4 in

yesterday and today i had a couple of things happen to me that i think tie in well with why many people believe in the supernatural, or in their ability to foresee events.

yesterday, i had to travel a few hundred miles to do an interview for a magazine article, and i knew stormy weather was coming here in vermont.

i had a bad feeling about the trip and the possible weather complications, so much so that i actually called my insurance company and checked on my coverage.

Caljuher

I think a lot of what makes prayer seem foolish to some is the way people use it. Most people seem to see prayer as asking God for something. While this is something you will find instructed in Judeo-Christian writings like the Bible, it is a far too simple and somewhat ignorant understanding of the concept of prayer by even some very “religious” people.

The epitome of prayer is considered to be not asking God for something and having the prayer answered, but as great mystics have taught, communing with God in order to lose self and serve others. As Teresa of Avila once explained it, once when she was traveling by donkey on a mission, she was thrown from the beast after crossing a rocky riverbed. She claims Jesus told her: “This is how I treat my friends.” To which she replied: “And that is why you don’t have many friends.”

Mystics like John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila and others teach a very different type of prayer than what is being discussed and advocated in religions. Hopefully some of the bright points brought out here on this board in these discussions will help people see that it often isn’t prayer or God that is useless, but often it’s us who are so self-centered we only want our needs fulfilled or want our viewpoint to be proven right. When prayer doesn’t work according to some preconceived ideas (like held within the Watchtower) prayer suffers the blame instead of the definition of "what it should be."

7

two part question (s)

by bite me in

hi, i hope everyone had a nice weekend!.

okay, to my two questions.

i figure i do it this way, because it's annoying to post something and realize i wanted to do another post, but couldn't.

Caljuher

As for question #2, the concept of the Witnesses regarding the connection between faith and works is actually not outside of mainstream religion. Except for some Fundamentalists, Christian religion in general teaches that faith saves, but it also inspires people to do the right thing. Even the most strict Fundamentalist views tend toward that understanding somewhat, but it is a bit more complicated to explain fully here.

The Watchtower concept of "doing the right thing" or "good works," however, is what is at issue. Are the good works really public preaching, going to all the meetings,filling out service reports, belonging to the organization, etc.? Not that the Witnesses do not also care for people in practical ways, it is just that this type of care for people's needs are generally only toward those that Witnesses view as deserving, and such works are deemed less important than the aforementioned.

As a side note, people often confuse the words in James to be a contridiction of Pauline theology that teaches that works can't save people. While James uses the same word generally rendered "works," it doesn't mean the same thing as the useless works of the Mosaic Law Paul was writing about. That is why you can find renderings of James 2:26 as found in the New Living Translation: "Just as the body is dead wihtout a spirit, so also faith is dead without good deeds." These types of "works" or "good deeds" live side by side with faith. In fact, real faith doesn't exist without them...but actions in themselves don't prove there is faith.

50

Why Religion?

by hillary_step in

jw
friends

i have no issue with a person having a spiritual dimension, but i wonder why people have difficulty accepting that the religion that an individual makes up inside their head is no more or less worthy than the ones other people have made up in their heads.. why do people feel the need to have others tell them what to believe and how to think?

simplistic though this may sound, this is at the basis of all religion.

does religion scratch the itch of our insecurities?.

Caljuher

I think it is a sad part of ourselves (and I think we are all prone to it) that none of us like to be wrong…especially proven wrong. We all like to think that we see things right, that we have the clearest, sharpest and most correct view. Some religions, like the JWs, actually pander to this fault of ego. We have an elitist side to us that we often battle and gets in our way from being honest with ourselves and others.

So whether a religion is based on fact or fiction, it can’t necessarily be judged fairly on just the adherent and their point of view. How do we know that their view of their adopted religion has not been clouded by ego?

And what makes people advance some idea and then tell others that the idea must be adopted? The same can be said about ideologies or philosophies—it isn’t just religious philosophies or views that get forced on people. Marxism and Fascism are examples.

While some people may exercise religion on exactly what you say, I don’t believe it is true that all religion is based on what you claim it is. Was Mohandas Gandhi trying to advance the idea that religion should be forced on people or that one group of people was better than another? How about Mother Theresa of Calcutta? Was she, by making sure people weren’t left to die in the streets, doing so to advance an ideology to force others to think a certain way? Both these people’s actions and lives were motivated by their deeply held religious convictions. Are they examples of people doing things just because they had an itch of insecurity, or is it that others are insecure about adhering to a set of virtues that often take courage to follow?

As one author put it regarding at least one religion: “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried."

23

FRAUDULENT door to door premise from the "Catholic" Governing Body

by Terry in

according to the organization with its governing body pronouncements of "truth", the bible was written for and directed to the chosen elite with the heavenly hope and not to the rank and file "other sheep.".

if this were truly so, would that not mean the admonitions to preach the good news of the kingdom would, logically, be directed soley to the chosen elite and not to the the rank and file as well?.

if the governing body possesses that magically spirit-directed message of truth--and they only--it would be irresponsible for non-anointed to take upon themselves work given to the chosen few, would it not?.

Caljuher

I've heard it mentioned by critics of the Watchtower that it's organization acts like a "poor cousin" of Catholicism. Whatever one's opinion of the Catholic Church is, the Watchtower can only dream of having as much organization, structure, or power.

That is why I think they are as oppressive as they are...they don't really have the power, kind of like those who are smart don't need to advertise it, and those who aren't but want others to believe they are constantly talk, trying to convince others they are. If you can't really hold your own Spanish Inquisition, you can at least smash others you don't like as much as you can.

33

Do you believe that the majority of JW's will be saved?

by JH in

if there is a god, do you think that the majority of jw's will be saved at armageddon?.

i'm not asking if they have the only true religion, i'm asking if you think they would be saved along with others who do god's will sufficiently to satisfy him.....

Caljuher

In my opinion--and it's just that, a personal opinion--I think it's pointless to ask such a thing. If there is a God who intends to justly "save" people, isn't it up to that God to decide who gets saved or not? Some religions and people enjoy the superiority that comes with thinking they know the answer to this (like JWs), but in the end no one can speak for God on this issue...even if I have been hurt by people in the Watchtower who I feel did some very evil things to me (and they have), it still isn't for me to decide.

Again, just a personal opinion.

8

let's talk about Holy Communion and the WTS "non-communion"

by potentialJWconvertswife in

here's the question: why do the whole memorial thing if (i'm assuming) there will be few or (in most cases) no one actually taking the sacrament?

and what reason does the wts give for saying only anointed can partake?

are there any examples of the disciples administering holy communion to any regular folks?

Caljuher

I didn't post information on the Didache to claim it as inspired of whatever. I am merely using it along with information from Justin Martyr to show that the Witnesses belief is wrong.

Also, the Didache isn't considered a false document by modern scholarship or the Apostolic Fathers as the source you are quoting from (Wikipedia) makes clear. It is a historical document, and just because it isn't canonized doesn't mean it is spurious (that is a Witness teaching by the way...not in the Bible, then it must be false).

Regardless, the main point is that the Witnesses have no link with historic worship as can be seen from many sources; the Didache is only one.

26

Ok, lets set the record straight was it a CROSS or a STAKE

by Witchs Son in

and what would you say about the book often referenced by the society as a backing for the stake theory, the non-christian cross by j. d. parsons ?.

you can also download it here if you prefer.

i know that book was written in 19th century so i hope that won't be used as an argument against it after all sir isaac newton's principia was written in 1687 and we aren't holding that against it either.

Caljuher

Both history and the Greek of the Bible actually disprove what the Witnesses teach about Jesus dying on a stake, and there are many good references here to prove that (good work everyone).

While I don’t recommend Wikipedia as a most accurate resource, its article on the cross and crucifixion is quite well-documented and has enough resources to shoot down any of the Witness beliefs on the matter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion

Here’s a photo from a book about Christian history that has what is considered to be one of the first drawings of what the instrument of Christ’s death looked like (click for better resolution). Interestingly, it was not drawn by Christians but by Romans who were ridiculing Christianity. It was found scribbled in an army officer’s quarters on Palatine Hill in Rome. It is from the early 200s. The caption reads: “Alexamenos worships his god.”

The image is of a man with the head of a donkey, and he is crucified, not impaled. If Romans really impaled instead of crucified people, these army men would not have drawn a cross. Also the Witnesses claim that “Christendom” introduced the cross, however as history and this photo show, it was well known to non-Christians how Jesus died.

8

let's talk about Holy Communion and the WTS "non-communion"

by potentialJWconvertswife in

here's the question: why do the whole memorial thing if (i'm assuming) there will be few or (in most cases) no one actually taking the sacrament?

and what reason does the wts give for saying only anointed can partake?

are there any examples of the disciples administering holy communion to any regular folks?

Caljuher

The Didache (or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) is one of the first writings that I remember hearing about to have any mention of communion. In one place it reads: “On the Lord’s own day gather together and break bread and give thanks, having first confessed your sins so that your sacrifice may be pure.”

The meetings or religious services or the first-century Christians are well documented, but the Watchtower never cites any of this information. Had I known now what I know then. For example, writing in the 150s, Justin Martyr wrote: “On the day called after the sun there takes place a meeting of all who live in the town or in the country. .. bread is brought, with wine mixed with water to the president [of the congregation].” Communion was then distributed to all.

Were there any people not allowed to partake of communion? Justin Martyr continued: “None is allowed to share unless he believes the things which we teach are true, and has been washed with the water that bring remission of sins and give a second birth, and lives as Christ order us so to live. For we do not receive them as ordinary bread and wine, but as Jesus Christ our Savior.”—The History of Christianity, pp. 40-41, DK Publishing.

Of course there is more in the Didache like this as well as the Apostolic Fathers, things we weren’t given access to when Witnesses, that show that the Witnesses have never followed the pattern of the first-century Christians in their Memorial celebrations. What they do has no historical basis in regards to the early church, but other religion services seem closer to the pattern.

I used to so proudly claim that I belonged to the religion most like the early Christians when I was a Witness, but the fact is I only learned (and repeated) the non-historical drip still offered by the Watchtower.

13

Paradise Earth????

by potentialJWconvertswife in

i know there has been a previous thread on this topic, but in spite of backing up through many many past topics i couldn't find it...can anyone explain this to me, please?

i mean, obviously the promise is that after being denied entry into heaven because they aren't one of the 144,000 the great crowd is stuck on earth, but it's somehow re-made into paradise?!

is there any scriptural support for this notion outside of the nwt?

Caljuher

Just did a double-check on that church of my dad's I used to go to as a kid. It was an Assemblies of God church.

13

Paradise Earth????

by potentialJWconvertswife in

i know there has been a previous thread on this topic, but in spite of backing up through many many past topics i couldn't find it...can anyone explain this to me, please?

i mean, obviously the promise is that after being denied entry into heaven because they aren't one of the 144,000 the great crowd is stuck on earth, but it's somehow re-made into paradise?!

is there any scriptural support for this notion outside of the nwt?

Caljuher

What I remember from previous Bible training by an evangelist father and a nominally-Catholic mother, the JWs did not invent the paradise earth concept. Both my dad's church (some kind of Pentecostal thing where they spoke in tongues) and my mom's church taught that the earth would be renewed somehow and the experience of heaven would somehow envelope this new earth.

My dad used to have this long scroll that looked like a more colorful and exciting version of the Plan of the Ages chart that showed his church's concept of this. I was also made to go to Catholic school, but just for the 6th grade, and I remember learning about the physical resurrection of the body, its reunited with the soul at judgment day. Neither side had any of the details we had in the Watchtower, however. There are some good articles on Wikipedia on these very subjects, and I checked on some of this to make sure I was remembering right (for a while there I was convinced the Witnesses came up with the whole thing).

What the JWs invented, however, was saying only some people experience heaven and made the new earth concept appear to be a second-class existence.