Mad Dawg

Joined

• started 43 topics
• posted 1,003 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Mad Dawg

• 
  8

  John 6:20 & John 8:58

  by PSacramento in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the often ( at least from the nwt point of view) debated verse of john 8:58. jesus said to them, truly, truly i say to you, before abraham was, i am.. also translated "verily, verily," or "most asuredly", but always "i am", excpet for the nwt that translates it:.

  before abraham came into existence, i have been.. now i am sure that there have been thread about this and how the words used in 8:58 - ego eimi mean:.

  ego = i, me, my.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  Because they can't allow the word of God to contradict their theology.
• 
  14

  Letter to former JW friends

  by bluecanary in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my mother has been burning to write a letter to old friends among the witnesses.

  we move around so much and were never great at keeping in touch.

  no one knows we've left the b0rg, but we don't care who finds out.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  The letter will probably find its way to certain individuals who are already questioning. It will be a God send for them.
• 
  145

  Are You Still Thrilled With President Obama?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  his motto is "yes we can!

  " has he done what you expected?

  any concerns?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  What exactly has he done?

  • Instead of submitting bills to Congress, he passes them off to be written by Congress with only vague White House input:
    • Stimulus
    • Clunkers
    • Health Care (In '93, Hillary submitted a complete bill to Congress.)
  • Instead of doing his own job, he has hired 32 “czars” to do it for him.

  Having him going around the world, hat in hand, saying “Gee, I’m sorry ‘Merka is such an evil nation” does nothing to instill confidence.

  Where is his leadership?
• 
  22

  should i report this child abuser?

  by highdose in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  i've already posted this on a recent thread, but just in case it gets ignored, i wanted it to have a thread of its own.

  as i'm quite uncertain as to what to do.... in the area that i just moved to i have discovered that there is a jw here that i used to know.

  the interesting thing about this jw is that when i knew him 20 years ago he fled my congo because a young sister spoke up and said that he had been raping her for years as a child.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  Yes! Yes! Hell, yes!! Other children need to be protected from this fiend. If he was raping that poor girl over an extended period of time, he is doing it to others. Go to the police. It is not easy. Just last week I reported a close relative for being a perv. When it is done you will feel better.

  BTW, the police have a knack for getting these people to confess.
• 
  62

  My SIL might be 'fishin'....?

  by AK - Jeff in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  my wife 'faded' during the same time i da'd myself.

  we are absolutely both on the same page.. it is interesting [and on another level disturbing] that 'status' plays so heavily in the minds of jw's and their relationships.

  as many others have related, my wife sometimes is engaged in conversations with jw's she meets in public, while all those same jw's will totally 'shun' me - sometimes in the same moment.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  That must have been some time ago.
• 
  35

  Pentateuch

  by Pippa in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hello.

  can anyone tell me who wrote the pentateuch?

  i'd be interested to hear.. pippa.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  Nark said:

  There is a lot of worn-out caricature and fallacy (of the 'strawman' or 'red herring' types in particular) in your argument, plus completely irrelevant issues -- such as about π...

  My point about π was to point out the nature of arguments for the JEDP theory. Whether the supposed contradictions involve science, sociology, or the text themselves, the point is the same – most are manufactured when a plain reading clears up the issue.

  for instance the dispositions of the so-called "Covenant code" in Exodus 20:22--23:19 differ from those in other parts of the Torah on a lot of topics (sacrifices and priesthood, 20:24f, compare Deuteronomy 12:5; slavery 21:1ff, compare Leviticus 25, etc.).

  {Exodus 20:24} An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee.

  {Deut 12:5} But unto the place which the LORD your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put his name here, [even] unto his habitation shall ye seek, and thither thou shalt come:

  OK, so what is the problem here? Please be more specific.

  Of course they can be reconciled -- that's what much of Jewish interpretation has been about in the past 2,000 + years.

  And quite easily at that. So what is the necessity of the JEDP theory?

  But the very difficulty bears the mark of legislations pertaining to and arising from different historical, economical, political contexts. Why would a single "lawmaker" working almost abstractly (not even mentioning divine inspiration) in a unique and rather constraint-free context (the Sinai desert) come up with such complexity?

  This is a theological question. To answer it you would have to acknowledge God as the author.

  The real problem is that very little in the Torah makes sense in a 2nd-millenium-BC context, …

  Why not?

  …while most of it is perfectly at home in a period running from the Assyrian to the Persian empires.

  You have your cause and effect backwards. Society did not give rise to new writings, the writings gave rise to a new society. The same is true of the US constitution. Using your logic, it could not have been written in 1786 because there were no democracies in the world at that time… it must have been written in the 20 th century where it would be perfectly at home.

  Leo said:

  Not to mention that the language itself is wholly inconsistent with such an early datation. We know a great deal about the history of West Semitic languages thanks to inscriptions and other epigraphic finds. If "Moses" wrote the Pentateuch, the language would have been closer to Ugaritic or the Canaanite found in the Tell el-Amarna tablets -- somewhat like Chaucer compared to our modern English. Rather, the language is much closer to the Hebrew of 1-2 Samuel (in the case of the some of the patriarchical narratives) or Jeremiah or Ezekiel (in the case of the material assigned to D and P, respectively).

  Which is what we would expect to find if Moses wrote in an earlier language that was later translated into Hebrew. The above doesn’t necessarily mean that the original was written later, but could easily mean that it was translated later.

  The poetry of Exodus 15 is clearly more archaic than that of the prose,

  If Shakespeare were re-written in modern English, his poems would still reflect the older structure they were written in while the prose would appear more modern.

  In fact, the author of the prose frame into which the poem is embedded misconstrued…

  What was he working from that he miscontrued? Do you have a copy of it? Please define:

  Ø yiqtol preterite tense forms

  Ø preterite use of wayyiqtol

  The methodology of determining the sources of the Pentateuch is not much different than that found throughout literary criticism in assessing the integrity and authorship of …

  Winnie the Pooh:

  Doublets occur. We may mention briefly the two accounts of meetings with a Heffalump (W 5; H 3). and two accounts of the building of a house.(H 1; 9), variously connected with Eeyore and with Owl. An excellent example of the redactor's method in intertwining his sources may be seen in the account of Pooh's being stuck in the entrance to Rabbit's house (W 2. 24). When Pooh realizes he is stuck, according to the first source:

  'Oh, help!', said Pooh. 'I'd better go back.'

  But according to the second source:

  'Oh, bother!', said Pooh. 'I shall have to go on.'

  The redactor has simply set down these two contradictory statements side by side, and then has attempted to harmonize them by his own conflation:

  'I can't do either!', said Pooh. 'Oh, help and bother!
• 
  34

  I Got My G.E.D.!!

  by palmtree67 in

  1. jw
  2. experiences
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  Congratulations!! Don't let anyone tell you that you are stupid!
• 
  76

  eugenics anyone?

  by ninja in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is the brother of rahm emanuel not liking the spotlight being pointed at him.......we are in trouble folks.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho-0shfeggo.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  Midget said:

  Planned parenthod has gotten alot of bad press but I honestly think it wasn't about eugenics.

  Margaret Sanger

  Founder of Planned Parenthood

  In Her Own Words

  From Here

  Copyright © 2001 Diane S. Dew www.dianedew.com

  "The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

  Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race

  (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)

  On blacks, immigrants and indigents:

  "...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who never should have been born." Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people

  On sterilization & racial purification:

  Sanger believed that, for the purpose of racial "purification," couples should be rewarded who chose sterilization. Birth Control in America, The Career of Margaret Sanger, by David Kennedy, p. 117, quoting a 1923 Sanger speech.

  On the right of married couples to bear children:

  Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her "Plan for Peace." Birth Control Review, April 1932

  On the purpose of birth control:

  The purpose in promoting birth control was "to create a race of thoroughbreds," she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)

  On the rights of the handicapped and mentally ill, and racial minorities:

  "More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- that is the chief aim of birth control." Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12

  On the extermination of blacks:

  "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," she said, "if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon

  On respecting the rights of the mentally ill:

  In her "Plan for Peace," Sanger outlined her strategy for eradication of those she deemed "feebleminded." Among the steps included in her evil scheme were immigration restrictions; compulsory sterilization; segregation to a lifetime of farm work; etc. Birth Control Review, April 1932, p. 107

  On marital sex:

  "The marriage bed is the most degenerating influence in the social order," Sanger said. (p. 23)

  On the YMCA and YWCA:

  "...brothels of the Spirit and morgues of Freedom!"), The Woman Rebel - No Gods, No Masters, May 1914, Vol. 1, No. 3.

  On motherhood:

  "I cannot refrain from saying that women must come to recognize there is some function of womanhood other than being a child-bearing machine." What Every Girl Should Know, by Margaret Sanger (Max Maisel, Publisher, 1915) [Jesus said: "Daughters of Jerusalem, weep... for your children. For, behold, the days are coming, in which they shall say, Blessed (happy) are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the breasts which never gave suck." (Luke 23:24)]

  On mandatory sterilization of the poor:

  One of Sanger's greatest influences, sexologist/eugenicist Dr. Havelock Ellis (with whom she had an affair, leading to her divorce from her first husband), urged mandatory sterilization of the poor as a prerequisite to receiving any public aid. The Problem of Race Regeneration, by Havelock Ellis, p. 65,

  On eradicating 'bad stocks':

  The goal of eugenicists is "to prevent the multiplication of bad stocks," wrote Dr. Ernst Rudin in the April 1933 Birth Control Review (of which Sanger was editor). Another article exhorted Americans to "restrict the propagation of those physically, mentally and socially inadequate."

  I don’t believe that it is mere coincedence that Planned Parenthood has a disproportionate number of their clinics in minority neighborhoods, particularly black. Or that blacks are over represented in abortion statistics. PP is all about eugenics.

  I can’t/don’t fault any one for screening to ensure they don’t pass on Huntington’s or MS to futre generations. The problem is when an outside entity tries to impose eugenics on others
• 
  76

  eugenics anyone?

  by ninja in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is the brother of rahm emanuel not liking the spotlight being pointed at him.......we are in trouble folks.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho-0shfeggo.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  Eugenics means literally, good genes. What proponents state is that it is the effort to improve the human gene pool. What is not said is the implicit mode of operation of reducing those who are considered to have “poor genes.”

  In 1931, Vermont passed eugenics legislation where illiterates, thieves, the insane, Abenaki Indians, paupers, alcoholics, epileptics, and anyone who seemed inferior due to their economic or physical conditions were targeted for forced sterilization to prevent ‘undesirables’ from breeding. These laws were not repealed until 1973. During this time, most other states had similar laws.

  Prominent people such as Peter Singer and Richard Dawkins have spoken in support of eugenics. It is quite disturbing that O would annoint such a crack-pot “science czar”.
• 
  70

  What Must an Angel Do To Repent?

  by cameo-d in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  has wt published literature implying that angels might repent and be forgiven?.

  we all know that god does not accept a simple "i'm sorry.".

  first of all, god requires two witnesses; then, an investigation asking all your friends and neighbors if the gossip is true.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Dawg

  Angels were not created in the image of God. Man is special in the sight of God. Angels are not.