lol maybe in another way too because the Internet maybe become the major factor in causing English to be the first totally global language....50 years from now we will have children growing up all bi-lingual with english as their business language....100 years from now using your own language will be for recreational use as a novelty,..200 years from now all languages accept english will be stuff for scholars to research as part of history..
Posts by reniaa
-
18Internet: Our Tower of Babel?
by cameo-d inour cell towers reach higher than the trees, up into "the heavens".
our satellites "in the heavens" bounce transmissions.. we have world wide communication in real time with the push of a button.
have we not created another tower of babel?.
-
-
-
60
Great Educational Tool for those studying or thinking of studying with JWS
by sf ini was doing some web surfing and catching up on my reading and came upon a post i hope may help some lurkers and seekers understand better what they are getting themselves into or may have already gotten into, by studying the bible with jws.. i surely hope it is not going against any rule to copy/paste this.
i will not include anything but the text.
i will say though that it is from a longstanding exjw support board that can be found here:.
-
-
reniaa
Hi shawn,
I love that word cognitive dissonance! do I switch off when people criticize Jw's and try and rationalise certain things to allow me to continue to be one? well this is a difficult issue because we all do when it concerns belief because we haven't got the answers to everything.
You have to decide if the evidence is overwhelming against something that there is no defence, on shunning the defence is the biblical scriptutres on it but how heavily do we apply it? here i agree with this forum in saying it's to harsh, i'm not trying to make excuses I accept it. But then I get people using cognative dissonance themselves when i mention the scriptures on shunning as they explain them away, Have you ever heard someone explain why being an adulterer, fornicator, gay isn't biblically wrong despite the scriptures? I think we are all in danger of rationalising towards our own viewpoint.
I first saw it on the Atheist site when I mentioned abiogenesis and this guy said how we began doesn't matter just that evolution is proved, another said I believe God started us off but then left evolution to do the rest both found ways to get past the difficult point of science not coming up with the answers rationalising it in their heads, I found myself doing it when trying to defend 'Noah's flood' it's a biggy because as science stands there is no prove of a worldwide flood quite the contrary but I survived by researching and finding out about all the flood stories worldwide like a collective memory, I told this to the atheist who then used his cognative dissonance to say well theirs always floods so you'll get flood stories,
The bible is what saves me if I use that as a centre to my beliefs then I can get by and as a poster above you says I should use a bible that hasn't so many mistranslations lol I would if one existed!!! when you get the catholics adding a scripture to try and uphold trinitarian beliefs and i've even had laialeo on here rationalise using the word cross even though it never appears in the bible and shes very strict on correct bible translation but if you believe in trinity you have to use cognative dissonace everytime you see a scriptures that say there is only one God.
We use a harsh scalpel here to cut at the deadwood away from WTs practises but if we then go on to swallow a lot of hoowie from another faith or belief then we haven't learned anything!
I feel genuine sadness for those hurt by some of the terrible mistakes done by WTS and can understand why they would never go back and that is their choice but for me JW's are still the most biblical correct of faiths because they are prepared to stand by what is written scriptually both the good stuff and the bad.
How many people on here have to apply cognative dissonace when viewing the apparent attrocities of God in the OT? I know I have on occasion, it's hard having to accept he did do those things, In this sense worshiping jesus helps i've noticed because then they can mentally divorce the OT from the Nt saying jesus is about love and ignore all that, I don't if I meet Jesus i'll be asking him why his father was so strict with the Israelites.
It's all swings and roundabouts in the end and each to there own. but I won't condemn Wts on one hand and then go on to accept similar stuff in another by virtue that it is just another faith they have to answer to the same set of rules in my book!
-
33
Witchtower twists yet another scripture 2Cor 12: 8 -10 Nov 15 WT
by hamsterbait innovember 15 study edition, p24 para 5.. "regarding his "thorn in the flesh", paul made fervent pleas to jehovah (the scripture actually says the lord) read 2 cor 12: 8 - 10) god did not miraculously relieve paul of the "thorn in the flesh".
instead, god strengthened him to endure it.
jehovah's (whose???
-
-
reniaa
Hi there laialeo your words are interesting,
We are talking on one or two words in the NT but what about moses using JHWH, he would have put vowel markers as was done with hebrew language (which didn't use vowels as we do) and as time went on they were allowed to be lost and finally we get the LORD change, was it jews or christians that changed JHWH for LORD?
And what do you think of how other Christian faiths happily use OT Scriptures obviously talking about Jehovah but use the LORD as if they are talking about Jesus? isn't this as incorrect as what you point out above in regards to NT,
Surely if we are going to be strict with the NT making sure the correct Lord is applied to the Correct LORD we should do the same with OT too?
Reniaa
-
60
Great Educational Tool for those studying or thinking of studying with JWS
by sf ini was doing some web surfing and catching up on my reading and came upon a post i hope may help some lurkers and seekers understand better what they are getting themselves into or may have already gotten into, by studying the bible with jws.. i surely hope it is not going against any rule to copy/paste this.
i will not include anything but the text.
i will say though that it is from a longstanding exjw support board that can be found here:.
-
-
reniaa
The problem with reading the article quoted at the begining of this post, is you'll goto next meeting and waiting for fanged, googly-eyed JW ghouls ready to jump on you and feast on your flesh while your paralised in a mind controlled state, but you go in and just find an ordinary group of people just trying to serve their God. you find a good mix including all personality types from the fashion conscious teen, to the gossipy older woman, to the earnest MS brother etc
I watched a documentary on london pentacostal type church were they got into the euphuric atmosphere were people start screaming unintelligable words (they call it speaking in voices) and screaming they are healed getting extremely frenzied, the documentary showed the people were exhibiting the same symptoms you would get from a rock concert. this scares me far more than JW's just getting on with their life trying to apply God's word,
From my research of brain washing type groups they actively encourage this type of frenzied hysteria and there is a definite history of people experiencing delusions in these hysterical states. JW's don't do this!
My advice to lurkers and newbies is take on board information you get from this forum but remember to judge for yourself from your own experiences, this forum is a melting pot of people who for many reasons have problems with Jehovah's Witnesses or Watchtower society so you'll get a lot of personal opinon stated as facts, research for yourself which is what I do, also remember to apply the same set of standards to all faiths and beliefs not just JW's
Reniaa
-
33
Witchtower twists yet another scripture 2Cor 12: 8 -10 Nov 15 WT
by hamsterbait innovember 15 study edition, p24 para 5.. "regarding his "thorn in the flesh", paul made fervent pleas to jehovah (the scripture actually says the lord) read 2 cor 12: 8 - 10) god did not miraculously relieve paul of the "thorn in the flesh".
instead, god strengthened him to endure it.
jehovah's (whose???
-
-
reniaa
lol i feel like i'm in a tennis court on this issue we keep batting a ball at each both having good points :)
Reniaa I don't know how many times I have to say it: It was not "superstition" that caused the Jews to stop speaking God's name. It was done out of respect for the Commandment that said "do not use God's name in a worthless manner". Yes I'm sure the Jews knew what God's name was but that does not mean that had to use it on a regular basis. Having the tetragrammaton written down is not the same as using the name "Jehovah" the same was you would "Bob, Joe or Bill".
THe Jews have a tradition of over-applying laws making them a burden to their people, thats how the talmud was created a set of oral laws that so over analised and minutised every aspect of a single law they got twisted to the point they conflicted with other bible laws, jesus himself commented on this.
Matthew 12:1-12 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society
Matthew 12
Lord of the Sabbath
1 At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them. 2 When the Pharisees saw this, they said to him, "Look! Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath."3 He answered, "Haven't you read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 4 He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread—which was not lawful for them to do, but only for the priests. 5 Or haven't you read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple desecrate the day and yet are innocent? 6 I tell you that one [a] greater than the temple is here. 7 If you had known what these words mean, 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice,' [b] you would not have condemned the innocent. 8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
9 Going on from that place, he went into their synagogue, 10 and a man with a shriveled hand was there. Looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, they asked him, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?"
11 He said to them, "If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out? 12 How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.
There is danger getting too strict, and I am fully aware that JW's have fallen into this trap on a few issue including disfellowshiping among others,
But back to the point in hand the strictness of jews using God's name tradition, clearly wasn't applied by moses who liberally used Gods name, the taking out of the vowels was done later than his writings or David who sung about Jehovah. If moses felt that he had to keep it holy he would have put Lord from the start but he did't it was a gradual change over time.
I guess the trick is what to be strict on and what not to be...I only use Jehovah when refering to God not as a would another person like erm bob, joe or bill,
and as i mentioned earlier jesus is equally mis-pronouced and probably would get as big a laugh as jehovah by those people you mention if thats what tickles their humour.
-
11
Jehovah spares those with mark on forehead--Watchtower
by cameo-d inin 612 b.c.e., a vision transports ezekiel to jerusalem.
what detestable things he sees happening in god's temple!when jehovah sends his heavenly executional forces (represented by "six men") to express his anger at the apostates, only those who have received 'a mark on the forehead' will be spared.. the watchtower july 1, 2007. p. 11, column 2 para.
revelation 14:9-11 (new international version).
-
-
reniaa
LOL how easily using the same word for two completely different things can cause confusion ^^
-
33
Witchtower twists yet another scripture 2Cor 12: 8 -10 Nov 15 WT
by hamsterbait innovember 15 study edition, p24 para 5.. "regarding his "thorn in the flesh", paul made fervent pleas to jehovah (the scripture actually says the lord) read 2 cor 12: 8 - 10) god did not miraculously relieve paul of the "thorn in the flesh".
instead, god strengthened him to endure it.
jehovah's (whose???
-
-
reniaa
hi carla and eyeslice i refer you both to the above posting, on how applying LORD wrongly goes the other way too and OT scriptures are used to refer to Jesus by just applying all LORD's in there to him too and with 6800 of them I would say they are worse than JW's in that respect.
You say Lord carla but if you just apply that as a blanket thats how you do end up with a 3 in 1 God belief because it confuses things, Holy spirit was basically just tagged on as a bonus
-
33
Witchtower twists yet another scripture 2Cor 12: 8 -10 Nov 15 WT
by hamsterbait innovember 15 study edition, p24 para 5.. "regarding his "thorn in the flesh", paul made fervent pleas to jehovah (the scripture actually says the lord) read 2 cor 12: 8 - 10) god did not miraculously relieve paul of the "thorn in the flesh".
instead, god strengthened him to endure it.
jehovah's (whose???
-
-
reniaa
Hi mary :) you make a very point on usage of Jehovah which certainly has had me thinking :)
Yes but if because your name isn't used, people suddenly get rid of it completely and start calling your son prince charles your majesty instead because men have decided to be too literal on a rule wouldn't that have made queen elizabeth mad?
Um, your illustration doesn't make any sense. No one has called Prince Charles "Your Majesty". His title is "His Royal Highness". Just because her subjects do not address her as "Elizabeth" does not mean that they're going to suddenly start address her son as "His Majesty". That simply would make no sense.
Actually, I find that most Christians and Jews are aware that God's name is YHVH and that has absolutely nothing to do with the Witnesses. It's there in the bible. I have no problem with using the name "Yahweh" or even "Jehovah" on occassion, but as I've already demonstrated, using it on a daily basis flies directly in conflict with the Commandment "You must not use the Lord's name in vain".
My point in my taking your elizabeth analagy further was to illustate that the superstition that clouded God's name was directly causal in trinity doctrine being adopted, there's no getting past having Lord assigned to both God and Jesus has created confusion. but should we use god's name on a daily basis hmmm well certainly in the written Old Testament it was used every other scripture 6800 times is an awful lot of usage, but then look at psalms they are songs full of jehovah's name look at psalm 23 in particular.
Psalm 23 A Psalm of David.
1 The LORD is my shepherd;
I shall not want.
2 He makes me to lie down in green pastures;
He leads me beside the still waters.
3 He restores my soul;
He leads me in the paths of righteousness
For His name’s sake.it's a big LORD so it is one replacing Jehovah and yet how many people think it is jesus? everyone outside of JW's, so songs they sung were full of jehovahs name, so was written word and the new testament may have issues over tetragramation but a word that is confirmed in it is hallelujah and that just basically means "praise to Jehovah" taking God's name in vain is an important issue but we have to ask ourselves if superstition and over-applying a law has lead to far in the other direction. and I personally feel Jw's have the right on this one
-
33
Witchtower twists yet another scripture 2Cor 12: 8 -10 Nov 15 WT
by hamsterbait innovember 15 study edition, p24 para 5.. "regarding his "thorn in the flesh", paul made fervent pleas to jehovah (the scripture actually says the lord) read 2 cor 12: 8 - 10) god did not miraculously relieve paul of the "thorn in the flesh".
instead, god strengthened him to endure it.
jehovah's (whose???
-
-
reniaa
hey there wobble,
I like to put an alternative viewpoint thx for appreciating it, If people can still be of the same opinion when they hear BOTH the fors and against, not just being a group of nodding yes men to each other then they have a stronger belief, in a way i'm helping as much as those that agree, lol even jesus needed to be tested in the desert 30 days and nights by satan hehe.
As for going back I've come full-circle really, I tried the alternatives for 10 years even went to other churches to see what they were like, my ex-partner was a pentacostal, I just found them all just variations of a theme even atheism or evolutionists, we all have to believe something whether it's ufo or we came from a Big bang or more commonly just ourselves and what our own mind decides what is ok and acceptable.
Men themselves don't change from the good and gentle to the tyranical and mean spirited, I find examples of all with every organisation.
in the end i tried to test my belief in the bible innitially going on an atheist forum, hearing all the reasons why believing in any God is man fooling himself, lol 100 page long discussions on the bible and alternative ancient manuscripts lol from the koran, upanishads/veda, tao-te-ching to talmud I found I couldn't give up the bible.But then which Christian religion? (its a question we all face unfortunately with increasing lack of conviction) the choices are endless my ex's faith showed me in a real way that there's a fine line between making all sinful people welcome then having them use forgiveness of sins principle to continue their wrongdoing as a 'get out of jail free card'
I admit as a born in JW, trinity is the hardest thing to get over, it so obviously a wrongly applied logical construct as the alternative arguement towards one God and jesus been his son for me has greater biblical back-up as well as actually not being a logical construct but an definitive bible statement, you will find nowhere in the bible it says 'We are 3 in 1' but you do find "I am one god" and as I say in above posts jesus backs this up, always assigning the credit to his father.
In Russels day Russel was just a another voice from among the centuries that was standing against current christian trends, part of the problem causing the deversity of christian faiths today is that reason alone, I often wonder if the One God christians hadd won the debate in the early centuries and catholism hadn't developed such a biblical unsustainable christian faith then would we be in this mess? (it isn't just the trinity thing, but the pope thing, the idol worship of cross and making jesus mother a virgin when the bible says she had more children etc, etc)
Name any alternative christian faith they all have developed from some man say hey this is wrong! or in my countries national faith Church of England a king saying "Hey i fancy a divorce and while you at it I should be worshiped like the pope" our queen is still official head of the church unusual even for a christian faith :S
By using jehovah, Jw's have me back to them (ps i did look at alternative one god christian faiths like christeldelphians but they don't believe in satan etc) One thing i find in favour of Jws is their ability to change even if it has led to some serious doctrinal mistakes (I still struggle with jesus/michael construct, and the strictness of disfellowshipping) Its harder to change a doctrine issue than any other issue, hense why when you look at any faith they may have changed one major issue but continued practising others from catholic teachings in particular the 'Trinity'.
It's far easier to get looser and shake off doctrinal issues completely the bible always had us taking certain things on faith like God's existence, noah's flood etc to go further and cloud it all in mystery and just sticking jesus on top like a cherry and say love everyone is really the easy option! for example it means on this forum you have all people agreeing on one thing the wrongness of JW's but in everything else they are completely disimilar just try a thread asking 'what faith they have chosen since JW's'?
-
33
Witchtower twists yet another scripture 2Cor 12: 8 -10 Nov 15 WT
by hamsterbait innovember 15 study edition, p24 para 5.. "regarding his "thorn in the flesh", paul made fervent pleas to jehovah (the scripture actually says the lord) read 2 cor 12: 8 - 10) god did not miraculously relieve paul of the "thorn in the flesh".
instead, god strengthened him to endure it.
jehovah's (whose???
-
-
reniaa
Good morning mary just caught your reply
It's one thing to know God's name. It's another to "use it in vain" or "in a worthless manner". That's simply the reason why the Jews haven't used it for over 2,000 years. It's not out of superstition, but rather out of respect. It's the same as people in England who know who their Queen is. Yet no one (except, I will assume her husband), addresses her as "Elizabeth". Instead, they call her "Your Majesty" out of respect.
Yes but if because your name isn't used, people suddenly get rid of it completely and start calling your son prince charles your majesty instead because men have decided to be too literal on a rule wouldn't that have made queen elizabeth mad? Jesus never wanted the position of god and he always put his father first without exception, it's only others that tried to worship him. it wasn't false modesty on jesus's part but a genuine determination to give his father the correct position. "My father is greater than I" (any person can see this just from reading any scripture on how jesus describes his feelings on his father and God, there isn't a single version that has jesus saying "I am god you should worship me)
And if you really want to get technical, "Jehovah" is not the correct pronouciation of YHVH anyway. So in actuality, the WTS is promoting an erroneous translation of God's name.
As for the name thing thats a weak argument at best! otherwise we'd all be saying yeshua instead of jesus, the pronounciation issue has been covered quite deeply in other threads by myself and others. and jehovah has been used for centuries well before JW's as a pronouciation it has more seniority than yahweh which is basically just an alternative at best, Whether to pronouce J as Y is moot point as with jesus we pronouce the J instead of Y too.