link

Joined

• started 49 topics
• posted 424 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by link

• 
  63

  Evolutionists Dogmatic like WTS?

  by Gedanken in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jrizo in a thread of mine on kangaroos and that seems to have vanished posted these remarks in response to points made by alanf:.

  alanf: pomegranate's mind is a fine example of the intellectual desert in which almost all creationists live.

  evidence is presented and they discount it with a few inanities and misquotations.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Rem,

  There is indisputable evidence that the world is round therefore it cannot involve dogma. So you see there is no need for fence sitting.

  With regard to the topic of this thread I would say " Im not sure which side is right because I have studied the subject"

  In my humble opinion, to say at this point in time that one side or the other of the creationist/evolutionist debate has been proven beyond doubt would be "just plain ignorant" (for want of a better expression).

  That's my dogma and I'm sticking to it so don't you dare disagree with me.

  Of course I could just toss a coin if that would make you happy.

  link
• 
  63

  Evolutionists Dogmatic like WTS?

  by Gedanken in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jrizo in a thread of mine on kangaroos and that seems to have vanished posted these remarks in response to points made by alanf:.

  alanf: pomegranate's mind is a fine example of the intellectual desert in which almost all creationists live.

  evidence is presented and they discount it with a few inanities and misquotations.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  We have the theory of evolution and the theory of creation. Neither can be supported with indisputable fact and therefore neither one is a certainty. Both belong in the realms of belief.

  Seldom do we see anyone getting worked up as much as when we tell them we do not agree with their beliefs. Check out 1. Creationists 2. Evolutionists and 3. JWs! There all dogmatic.

  This thread has an excellent title but it misses out the Creationist part

  link
• 
  24

  The "faithful slave" truth or lie?

  by apocalypse in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  so then, as we examine the context of these verses we ask the question "when?".

  42 "...you do not know on what day your lord is coming.

  44 ...at an hour that you do not think to be it, the son of man is coming.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Hi Ozzie and Apocalypse

  I think that what is meant here is that the Watchtower teaching regarding Matthew 24:44 has fulfilment at Armageddon whereas 24:45 was fulfilled 1914-19.

  I also believe that the context of these two verses in the Scriptures show that they take place at the same time i.e. Armageddon.

  Apocalypse please correct me if I do not have this right. Good post by the way!

  link
• 
  67

  Does Our Arguing Scare People Off???

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  with so much going on over here, do you think that newbies, lurkers, or potenial apostates could or do get scared off from this place?

  if someone is on the fence and they want to explore the internet and are warned that all you'll see are disgruntled apostates, could these forums make them think the "faithful and discreet slave" is actually right?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Some excellent points made here to which I would like to add:

  I mentioned in an earlier post on the board that I had tried to get a doubting dub interested in reading here. Whilst wishing to exit the borg he did not wish to exit the Christian religion and that is where the problem lies.

  He felt that the atheists had a fairly strong grip and seemed to shout the loudest. Anyway, it wasnt for him. It was not the arguing that put him off.

  Another point that he noted was that long time posters with big titles and big numbers after their names we able to freely sprout rubbish for which a newbie or short time poster got hammered for.

  I thought the observations were quite interesting.

  link
• 
  6

  Is it a gamble?

  by link in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a jw family member tells me that dealing in stocks and shares = placing capital at risk in the hope of obtaining financial reward without working.

  he claims that it is therefore unchristian.. is this view correct?

  apart from stocks and bonds donated to it, is there any evidence that the society uses subscriptions to deal on the markets?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  larc,

  Many thanks. This seems to clear the matter up nicely although it does beg the question, why work?

  link
• 
  6

  Is it a gamble?

  by link in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a jw family member tells me that dealing in stocks and shares = placing capital at risk in the hope of obtaining financial reward without working.

  he claims that it is therefore unchristian.. is this view correct?

  apart from stocks and bonds donated to it, is there any evidence that the society uses subscriptions to deal on the markets?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  A JW family member tells me that dealing in stocks and shares = placing capital at risk in the hope of obtaining financial reward without working.He claims that it is therefore unchristian.

  Is this view correct? Apart from stocks and bonds donated to it, is there any evidence that the Society uses subscriptions to deal on the markets?

  Any info. on this would be very helpful to me.

  Thanks

  link
• 
  13

  Need help with a few questions please

  by rejoice in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i lived next door to a jw for 3 years and we became very good friends although it was often a strained relationship.

  i would read the books and even listen to the tapes from kh she gave me but, when i had questions or showed an opinion she would become so angry.

  i was reared a southern baptist and still am today and claim jesus christ as my savior through his grace.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Hi rejoice,

  I have found that many JWs have their own strange little beliefs that are not taught in their religion. One of these is the one you mention about others being saved at Armageddon through association with them. I have heard that on a number of occasions and think it stems from their own alleged association with the 144,000. (Sorry, dont want to confuse you with their doctrines)

  Also, with regard to the word apostate, many witnesses have their own interpretations of this word which do not line up with the dictionary definition. I have very often heard it used to describe anything that is written or spoken which does not accurately reflect the beliefs of Jehovas Witnesses. Hence, according to them, you can get an "apostate book" or "apostate newspaper" or an "apostate recording" etc etc.

  There is no one thing that you could say to help your friend unless she wants to leave.

  Hope this helps

  link
• 
  108

  The Real Truth About Raymond V. Franz Revealed!

  by bjc2012 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  and for those reasons, coj wanted in the beginning, to stay with the organization, just like bill bowens.

  that is all carl wanted.

  yes, as members of the governing body, they knew full well, exactly what carl's writings meant.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Something bothers me!

  treatise

  | trits, -z | n. & v. LME . [AN tretis, f. OFr. traitier TREAT v.: see -ISE 1.] A n. 1 A written work dealing formally and methodically with a subject. Formerly also gen., a literary work, a book. LME . b A spoken or written story or narrative. LME-E17 . c A description or account (of something). L16-L17 . 2 a Negotiation, discussion or arrangement of terms. LME-M17 . b A treaty. LME-M16 .

  fact

  | fakt | n. Also (repr. dial. pronunc., now US) fack | fak | . L15 . [L factum use as n. of neut. pa. pple of facere do, make.] Truth; reality. L16 . 4 A thing known for certain to have occurred or to be true; a datum of experience. & in pl. Events or circumstances as distinct from their legal interpretation. E18 .

  I have read COJs treatise as contained in his book The Gentile Times Revisited and I found it to be (IMHO) an excellent work. It was well researched, well thought through and presented a logical case based on all of the information that was known to the author at the time.

  My question is this; at what point in time does bjc2012 claim that this treatise passed into the realms of fact. Surely it is at this point that, not only RF and BB et.al. but every Witness should have departed from the organisation.

  (sorry if this tends to repeat the above post from scholar)

  link
• 
  12

  A question about 1914

  by chibiwellington in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i am researching the jw religion...and i was talking to a man who was going to join.

  he told me something about satan and his angels not being cast out until 1914...because that's when the first war in heaven happened.

  i don't know how accurate he was, but please, if someone could help clear me on this?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Chibiwellington,

  You have managed to hit on quite a controversial subject. I have a fairly large library of Watchtower material and 1925 is the very earliest that I can find any evidence that the return of Jesus Christs in 1914 was accepted as Warchtower doctrine. All their literature shows that before 1925, the belief was that Christ had returned in 1874.

  I have requested information from several "learned" Jehovahs Witnesses which would contradict this but none has been made available to me.

  link
• 
  24

  Top 10 points proving JW belief is false.

  by mamashel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i need some really good points to prove to my husband once and for all, everything i have learned so far is right.

  we were talking again last night, and he actually for the first time said he would look at the information that i have found.

  i have the coc book, and i dont want to throw a whole bunch of stuff at him at one time.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  I know that everyone is going to hate me for saying this (so why say it?) buuuu....t:

  "The Truth" is a belief system. It is not based on fact but an individuals beliefs therefore it cannot be "proven" either one way or the other. You are not being asked to prove anything, you are being asked to dis-prove it and thats very difficult.

  The only reasons that a person will leave this belief system is if remaining in it is causing them pain and if leaving it can be seen to be less painful than remaining in. There has to be a reward for leaving greater than the reward for staying in. Therefore find out why the person needs to stay in and work on this single aspect.

  I agree that doing this is difficult and requires a great deal of thought, especially if the persons carrot is "everlasting life on a paradise earth" The big thing is that the person must at least be willing to listen and I think youve got that already, but don't rush it

  link