Posts by Paulapollos

112

Can anyone come up with a morally acceptable reason for waiting thousands of years to end wickedness?

by gubberningbody in

jw
friends

i can't.. some bar-bet between jehovah and satan balanced against all the evil allowed just doesn't wash..

Paulapollos

CyberJesus:

I think you were talking to me? If so, thanks.....I don't know if it's a change of heart as such.....more that I just am tired of people trying to make excuses for this God, this character who seems to have a lot of people on this planet who need to defend him.

Let's be honest here - JW's come up with some ridiculous "sovereignty" thing, which just sounds like a bunch of kids trying to justify why Daddy let the girl next door get raped instead of stopping it. Christans come up with various things like "If everyone accepted Jesus, we would all be like happy bunnies, but God is patiently waiting for us to convert" and so on.

Either way, whatever you believe, the facts are these - people are getting hurt every day, and we get told that it's all part of "God's mysterious plan". Ok, that's fine - but people who worship this God should not be surprised if others think this Biblical God is a complete and utter *******, and that we would all be better off without him. It's smacks of blinders when people try to make excuses for him. Don't these people think that perhaps the genocidal, legalistic, exacting God of the OT doesn't want them to make an excuse for him? Wouldn't he have made it a bit clearer if he did? Maybe this is the way he wants it? I don't know, it's like people have built an image of some cuddly Grandad, when the God of the Bible seems a pretty ruthless character to me...

I tend to agree with TheFinger: "

There is no way that this God has a morality even remotely resembling what a decent person would be considered morally upright......however it does argue strongly against every concept of God as represented by any organized religion."

Frankly, I think the God who has the morality displayed in the Bible doesn't really give a **** what we think. If that means you don't want to worship him/her/it, then God knows (in more ways than 1, I think!) where you are coming from.

PP

112

Can anyone come up with a morally acceptable reason for waiting thousands of years to end wickedness?

by gubberningbody in

jw
friends

i can't.. some bar-bet between jehovah and satan balanced against all the evil allowed just doesn't wash..

Paulapollos

How can there be a "morally acceptable" reason? I've used this before, and forgive the crudity of the example...

If I was an armed police officer, and I was walking past a woman being brutally gang-raped in the street, and I simply stopped and watched, and called out "I'm not stopping this because it will be good for you in the long run", what would you think of me?

Could I ever provide a "moral justifaction"? Could I ever say "Well, the reason I didn't step in, is that there is a chap down the road who bet me that if I didn't help this lady, she wouldn't be my friend afterwards." Is that really a moral justification?

I have to say that all the evidence points to a God who really does not give a flying monkey's about whether we think he is moral or not.No wonder people hate him - not that he seems to care about that either. It seems to me that the God of the Bible is exceedingly post-modern in his philosophy.

PP

144

Ray Franz Was Wrong

by Farkel in

jw
friends

god rest his soul.

although i never met him personally, he and i did correspond a number of times, and i have numerous friends who have not only met him, but stayed several days with he and cynthia at their home.

if nothing else, ray was kind, non-judging, and generous.

Paulapollos

Leolaia really hits the nail on the head.

I cannot say that I think that the GB are deliberate liars, that they have set out to deceive. I certainly don't think that they mis-quote and selectively choose information in the full knowledge that what they are presenting is a lie.

Lady Lee said they are "victims of their own delusions", and I must say that I can think of no better phrase. Here you have a group of men who have been reared on the stories of the organisation being the one true vehicle of God; an organisation that has been attacked mercilessly by Satan, slandered by religious opposers and so forth - and all because of, in the words of the Society, they are "seeking to discern Bible truth." This belief, this persecution and innocence complex is ingrained in these men.

As they have risen through the ranks of the organisation, they have had to face many challenges from without. Every time they have "won" a case at the ECHR, or in the US Supreme Court, their conviction has been bolstered that yes indeed, Jehovah the "God of their forefathers", Rutherford and Russell, is with them. They were taught that it was an irrefutable paradigm that if the organisation survived and grew, Jehovah was guiding them. And as it has indeed survived and prospered, so their conviction has grown.

When we talk about deliberate lying, the organisation don't see it like that. It is the same as the Abraham issue. When you read the WT that talks about Abraham lying about his wife, you notice it never states Abraham lied. Nor does the WT dealing with Rahab. Why? Because it is impossible for these men to conceive that these individuals, ostensibly approved by God, could have knowingly done wrong - so the justification, the whitewashing begins. And so it is with the organisation today. They simply cannot conceive that the approved servants of God, Rutherford, Russell, Knorr and so forth, lied or deceived or did anything with less than pure motives. And so it is presented like that in the WT.

Similarly, the current typical Witness has been raised on this view, and considers the present body to be a group of upstanding men with God's evident approval on them. When the GB say things that you and I would consider to be lies, I don;t think they ever see it like that. They assume that because God doesn't make mistakes, his servants who prophesised about impending Armageddon in 1914, 1925, 1975 and so on, did not do so, because that would mean a mistake was made. So, evidently, the WT writers back then did not mean it like that. And this is what they believe - that everyone who reads the other way has bad motives.

Similarly with the blood issue. They really genuinely believe they are doing God's will. While I'm not advocating belief in God or not, I think what Jesus said (paraphrased) is really spot-on: "There will come a time when they will kill you, and imagine they are rendering a sacred service to God." The GB really do believe they are doing God's will in all matters. They really are trying to be "conscientious Christians." They are doing everything they can to please this image of God they have. And when people think they are doing good.....well, that's when they hurt the most people.

Just like seeking to understand why a rapist commits the crime, does not mean we excuse the crime; so trying to understand why the GB acts like it does, does not mean we excuse their responsibility for their decisions. But I think the ultimate responsibility here lies in human nature - the ability to dogmatise and reinforce our own belief structure, to filter out contrary information, to believe we may even be the sole arbiters of truth. And that, I think, is a failing more pervasive than we like to admit.

PP

69

I feel ashamed of some of you

by Lady Lee in

jw
friends

i did not sleep well last night.

i tossed and turned until 4 am .

got up and decided to see what was going on.. i am so disappointed in some of you.. simon posted a thread requesting people not post links to the new shepherding book.

Paulapollos

Is it me, or is this "new" release just a very boring rehash of a very boring original? Certainly no great shakes.If it wasn't for the shocking child abuse instructions, it would hardly be worth the time.

PP

69

I feel ashamed of some of you

by Lady Lee in

jw
friends

i did not sleep well last night.

i tossed and turned until 4 am .

got up and decided to see what was going on.. i am so disappointed in some of you.. simon posted a thread requesting people not post links to the new shepherding book.

Paulapollos

Hi,

I have to admit that it seems perfectly reasonable for the WTS to wish to keep certain documents and manuals totally in-house. After all, the material that they have written is indeed their own - they created it, they wrote it, and they do not owe any non-Witness the right to view said documents. I don't think it is indicative of a cult for a corporation to have certain documents that are confidential to it's onsite branch management.

That still doesn't mean that that information should not be leaked by those who feel it is in some way dangerous or controversial, and that anyone should feel they should or should not read such material, should it come into their possession. Wikileaks, anyone? Non-Witnesses do not owe the Watchtower and Bible Tract Society anything, either.

Of course, it is entirely appropriate for Simon to request nobody posts links on this site, thus endangering such an excellent board by possibly illegal activites. There are, after all, many other ways to get hold of such "confidential" documents. I believe DJEggnog and Lady Lee have indeed rendered a valuable service to everyone here.

PP

25

Is the WT going to move on this leak?

by wheelwithinwheel in

jw
friends

i'm sure the legal, public relations and other depts.

are all asking the gb how to handle this situation.

and i'm convinced the gb is scratching it's head trying to decipher j's spirit direction in all of this.

Paulapollos

Apart from protesting about the links, and getting them removed, what can be done? I must say, I personally have enjoyed this fine new spiritual food, which I most certainly did NOT get from this site.

Jehovah provides, even for those wicked disfellowshipped - praise God!

PP

56

has this been on the site before? about there never having claimed to be a prophet?

by booby in

*** w72 4/1 p. 200 they shall know that a prophet was among them' ***.

yes, the time must come shortly that the nations will have to know that really a "prophet" of jehovah was among them.

actually now more than a million and a half persons are helping that collective or composite "prophet" in his preaching work and well over that number of others are studying the bible with the "prophet" group and its companions..

Paulapollos

ElderPatrol,

You don't seem to have answered...so can I ask you a serious question? Based on your posts, are you trying to say that

A) it is perfectly plausible to be an "un-inspired" prophet

B) because you use a definition of the word prophet that you have chosen, as opposed to the prognostication common to many Biblical prophets

If so, can you advise what relevance, if any, the Mosiac definition of false prophecy has today?

PP

56

has this been on the site before? about there never having claimed to be a prophet?

by booby in

*** w72 4/1 p. 200 they shall know that a prophet was among them' ***.

yes, the time must come shortly that the nations will have to know that really a "prophet" of jehovah was among them.

actually now more than a million and a half persons are helping that collective or composite "prophet" in his preaching work and well over that number of others are studying the bible with the "prophet" group and its companions..

Paulapollos

ElderPatrol,

You don't seem to have answered...so can I ask you a serious question? Based on your posts, are you trying to say that

A) it is perfectly plausible to be an "un-inspired" prophet

B) because you use a definition of the word prophet that you have chosen, as opposed to the prognostication common to many Biblical prophets

If so, can you advise what relevance, if any, the Mosiac definition of false prophecy has today?

PP

56

has this been on the site before? about there never having claimed to be a prophet?

by booby in

*** w72 4/1 p. 200 they shall know that a prophet was among them' ***.

yes, the time must come shortly that the nations will have to know that really a "prophet" of jehovah was among them.

actually now more than a million and a half persons are helping that collective or composite "prophet" in his preaching work and well over that number of others are studying the bible with the "prophet" group and its companions..

Paulapollos

I think Ding's might be the better looking brother of mine!

56

has this been on the site before? about there never having claimed to be a prophet?

by booby in

*** w72 4/1 p. 200 they shall know that a prophet was among them' ***.

yes, the time must come shortly that the nations will have to know that really a "prophet" of jehovah was among them.

actually now more than a million and a half persons are helping that collective or composite "prophet" in his preaching work and well over that number of others are studying the bible with the "prophet" group and its companions..

Paulapollos

ElderPatrol,

can I ask you a serious question? Based on your posts, are you trying to say that

A) it is perfectly plausible to be an "un-inspired" prophet

B) because you use a definition of the word prophet that you have chosen, as opposed to the prognostication common to many Biblical prophets

If so, can you advise what relevance, if any, the Mosiac definition of false prophecy has today?

PP