Much as I probably shouldn't read this latest issue right now, oh, what the heck? I'll dive in. Thanks for reminding me it's the halfway point of the month. I was so fixated on 'Man of Steel' that I'd forgotten.
--sd-7
Posts by sd-7
-
362013 Sept WT out
by Gayle incould only just quickly scan it.
still trying to 'duck' out of 1914.. in a similar way, at the beginning.
of the 20th century, there were a number.
-
-
-
36
2013 Sept WT out
by Gayle incould only just quickly scan it.
still trying to 'duck' out of 1914.. in a similar way, at the beginning.
of the 20th century, there were a number.
-
-
sd-7
Looks like I need to translate another paragraph:
Even many who claim to be religious [non-JWs, who can't possibly be religious, since they have no religious bones in their bodies] feel that they are at liberty [that's like the f-word to JWs] to do what they think is right, without any obligation to obey God [Watchtower] and his [Governing Body's] commandments. (Ps. 14:1) This attitude may pose a real threat to true Christians [Jehovah's Witnesses]. The unwary [you're naive and stupid if you feel that thinking will help you figure out anything] may adopt the same view of [Watchtower policies and procedures] theocratic arrangements. They may be unwilling to go along with [Watchtower's directives to elders about the] congregation procedures and may even complain [disagree, however respectfully] about anything not to their liking [because there can't be anything wrong with the procedure, it can only mean that you don't like it]. Or they may have reservations about Bible-based [Watchtower] counsel on entertainment [how you enjoy your free time], use of the Internet [what you look at on your own computer], and the pursuit of higher education [anything that introduces critical thinking or reading above a 6th grade level].
--sd-7
-
47
Overlapping Generations: A wacky kool-aid thread
by RayPublisher inanother wacky kool aid thread for your reading pleasure from the hardcore dubbs on jw talk dot net is here if you want to read it:.
they wax philosophical, they curse this horrible old world, they gently try to project how soon the big a will come, and then swoon when someone quotes a tidbit from a gb member that they overheard.
warning: those with weak stomachs do not read!.
-
-
sd-7
It goes to show just how seriously JWs take the words of Governing Body members, as if they really do have some sort of timeline from above sitting on their desk. Hey, we probably all thought that, until we didn't. I think many JWs are conscious that, well, as Tone Loc wisely said many years ago, "Somethin' ain't stirrin' in the Kool-Aid, Ace." But they'll talk about it so far as it's mentally comfortable to do so. But these kinds of discussions are probably why JWs are warned about using the Internet 'improperly'.
--sd-7
-
43
The apparent contradiction of John 3:13
by EdenOne inthe wts uses john 3:13 to prove that before jesus no one was taken to heaven.. in the nwt, john 3:13 reads:"moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but he that descended from heaven, the son of man.".
notice a difference to the king james bible:.
john 3:13 - "and no man has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man who is in heaven.
-
-
sd-7
Also, Tater makes a good point. Sometimes I wish the Bible were more like a book that had a Universal Translator attached to it, so it would be easy to understand for anyone and everyone who could read. But then I'm not really big on the Bible anymore myself, save for specific research purposes.
--sd-7
-
43
The apparent contradiction of John 3:13
by EdenOne inthe wts uses john 3:13 to prove that before jesus no one was taken to heaven.. in the nwt, john 3:13 reads:"moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but he that descended from heaven, the son of man.".
notice a difference to the king james bible:.
john 3:13 - "and no man has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man who is in heaven.
-
-
sd-7
Too rich for my blood. I've never researched the issue, so I can't speak meaningfully on it. But certainly the WT has a tendency to take statements made in the context of another subject entirely and turn them into an absolute declaration. Especially when it comes to matters of death and resurrection. So...I see your point, but can't really go any further than that.
--sd-7
-
18
Why JW's take on education is truly disingenuous
by Black Man inwe've all waxed poetic about the jw views on higher education and how they truly stifled people trying to pursue an education.
but what did they offer as an alternative??!!.
at least mormons (who's theology is as equally fucked up as jws) had an accredited school in brigham young university that their people could aspire to attend.
-
-
sd-7
Much as it may seem crazy, the Theocratic Ministry School does provide some training that is useful: public speaking. Otherwise, everything else means you can read (and comprehend: see any meeting where you can underline the answer, assuming the answer isn't the whole paragraph) at maybe a 6th grade level. The Service Meeting could equip you for door-to-door sales...
But otherwise, it's not very useful in the real world. I think Randy Watters (the living legend, Dogpatch) once pointed out that while the Society denies the right to higher education to its followers, it has no problem employing the use of lawyers, doctors, dentists, and the like when it serves the Watchtower's purposes to do so. So it's a double standard, clearly.
--sd-7
-
16
the hobbit
by Hortensia ini downloaded the hobbit.
didn't see it in theaters because at nearly three hours, it's just too damned long.
not sure i'm going to make it through the whole movie.
-
-
sd-7
Well, I personally enjoyed 'The Hobbit'. It seems you pointed out a significant tone problem with the way the film starts--showing Smaug and all that first maybe wasn't the best way to start it, since that stuff doesn't even pay off until much later in the story anyway. To me it was mostly the Dwarves and Bilbo being chased by one thing or another for a long time. I felt like it was enjoyable and engaging, but it didn't entirely pull me in until the Stone Giants scene.
I did think the humor was good and the action was interesting, but there wasn't anything that made me feel like this is LOTR until much later in the film. And the Riddles in the Dark scene was without doubt the highlight of the film. I did find it peculiar that Azog was given scenes in the film, and I thought fitting in the White Council was a stroke of genius. I mean, there was certainly stuff in LOTR that was taken from the Appendices--Aragorn and Arwen, for instance, which is barely mentioned in the main book, or the history of how the One Ring was lost. So I saw no problem with bringing that stuff into The Hobbit. All in all, it was a good film, but maybe just shy of the brilliance of the LOTR trilogy.
I tried watching it a second time and I have yet to do so...but then maybe that's 'cause I don't want the Mrs. to see that I'm watching 'The Hobbit'. I think the story would've worked better if they'd stuck entirely to the book, which moves at a fairly good pace--frankly, this is a story that I would think could have been told in one film, or at most two films. I'm still trying to figure out how the White Council's story somehow makes this into a third film, unless maybe they're going to include a rather detailed story of Saruman's becoming corrupted and his dealings with Rohan and/or Gondor, if I recall correctly...
The funny thing was, when I was watching 'Hobbit' with subtitles, there were these weird moments where the subtitles would even tell you what kind of music was playing. (EPIC MUSIC) appearing on the screen at a pivotal moment in the finale really ruined the moment for me...made it seem almost absurd. Maybe I should try watching it without the subtitles, it's just sometimes I have trouble hearing what the characters say.
As for Star Trek, I was excited about 'Into Darkness'--so much so that I read the novelization. I rarely go to theaters anymore, I think the last film I saw in a theater was 'The Dark Knight Rises'. The story, in my opinion, was great. Great action and humor and heart just like the first one. Plus an interesting twist on how Star Trek '09 affects some of the things that should've happened on the Enterprise's various Trek stories. I think I was left wanting more from the character Benedict Cumberbatch plays, but there's still a lot to enjoy there. But I'm speaking as one who read the novel, and usually the novels are more insightful and detailed than the movie is. I look forward to whatever happens if there's a third film. But with Episode VII possibly taking Abrams out of the equation, it could make an opportunity for some really good ideas or some really bad ones. Which is like saying nothing at all, right? Right.
--sd-7
-
15
Hate Speech
by Roberta804 ini was listening to a recording on youtube taken from the 2013 convention on "human apostates".
the term "mentally diseased" is way over the line.
can you imagine if they called blacks or catholics or god forbid, muslims "mentally diseased" what kind of trouble there would be?
-
-
sd-7
Right. I think even Jason David BeDuhn, who praised the way a lot of the NWT's verses are rendered, would probably say the term 'mentally diseased' is a shrill, over-the-top translation, and besides, Paul certainly wasn't using it in the same way JWs are.
Either way, I believe a few folks have posted the text of the talk on JWN, and I highlighted all the negative traits they assigned to apostates, and in attempting to count them all, I lost track at 30. Mind you, that's mostly excluding the term 'apostate' itself. How they can call themselves Christian and yet engage in such speech is beyond me. But in hindsight, they're imitating their original founder, J.F. Rutherford. He was the master of hate speech, if you read some of the old stuff, and in imitation of him, the WT will send out JWs with their hate speech in the literature and then use them as poster children of faith in the face of persecution when the governments/the public respond with hatred in kind.
But again, this actually works in our favor in terms of putting up red flags in the minds of people who are already doubting. They will recognize fear when they hear it. Nobody goes to this length to condemn a group without providing meaningful supporting details unless they're just afraid, very afraid. So then, what are they so afraid of? What is it that apostates know that is so dangerous? That was my first thought when I began my search. Hopefully this sort of thing will prompt many more thinkers to wake up.
--sd-7
-
28
I know this sounds crazy but, what if?
by earthfire inso i've been thinking about my jw family members a lot lately, especially since i just saw them a couple of weeks ago at my youngest sisters wedding.
with all the current animosity towards apostates that seems to be more aggressive than usual it hit me when i saw this posted on fb today.
would it be possible for the gb to demand that jw's kill apostates?
-
-
sd-7
I've thought about this issue, too. I even brought it up at my judicial committee, said to the elders, "You'd probably kill me over this if they told you to." The chairman's response was that the Bible does very clearly condemn violence. "Well," I said, "maybe not everyone would do it."
In hindsight, it occurred to me: since when does a little thing like the Bible ever get in the way of them doing whatever they really want to do?
I think I even wrote a satire on this issue, of what it would sound like if they issued such an order. I'll post the link below. Note: Let's NOT mention this satire at all during the year 2019, juuust in case someone out there's unstable enough to believe it's a real article:
--sd-7
-
212
Candace Conti v Watchtower Society | June 3, 2013 | Respondent's Brief - prepared by Rick Simons | A136641
by jwleaks injw leaks has published the respondent's brief prepared by rick simons in the case: candace conti v. watchtower bible and tract society of new york & fremont congregation of jehovah's witnesses.
(90 pages).
http://jwleaks.org/candace-conti/.
-
-
sd-7
Just from reading the first day's transcript from the trial, I felt like my blood pressure was going to spike. I don't think I can read any more about it without self-destructing. I'd been curious about--and had never really done much by way of research on--this issue of child abuse in the WT. I actually saw the old Dateline special back when it came out, and I was still a JW back then. It disturbed me, but...I somehow shrugged it off (despite secretly visiting the Silent Lambs website at that time. I think I knew something wasn't right with the religion but I was afraid to act on it at the time). But this trial really impressed upon me just how much the Society is capable of for the sake of self-preservation. It's chilling.
I'm thinking I should stop reading it for the sake of my health, and yet after reading the first day, I very much want to read all the rest of the trial. (sigh) Did anyone read the whole thing? How on earth did you handle it?
--sd-7