Posts by teel

2

Debator, or any JW apologists, please give me your oppinion re: mind control

by teel in

i happened to surf on the "cult checklist" page on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/cult_checklist where i found the well-known robert lifton's list, with small explanations in parenthesis.

please explain what do you think which of these doesn't apply to jw's and why.

or alternatively, if it all fits, why do you think it's still fine?

teel

I happened to surf on the "Cult checklist" page on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_checklist where I found the well-known Robert Lifton's list, with small explanations in parenthesis. Please explain what do you think which of these doesn't apply to JW's and why. Or alternatively, if it all fits, why do you think it's still fine? If you think all (or most) points are applyable to JW's, but only because the Bible says so, then please explain why do you think the Bible promotes mind-control techniques.

Milieu control (controlled relations with the outer world)
Mystic manipulation (the group has a higher purpose than the rest)
Confession (confess past and present sins)
Self-sanctification through purity (pushing the individual towards an unattainable perfection)
Aura of sacred science (beliefs of the group are sacrosanct and perfect)
Loaded language (new meanings to words, encouraging black-and-white thinking)
Doctrine over person (the group is more important than the individual)
Dispensed existence (insiders are saved, outsiders are doomed)

27

Why should I attend the meetings again?

by asilentone in

jw
friends

.

teel

Because you're a masochist.

21

generation overlap

by cskyjw.sun in

in 1914 say an anoited was 14 years old lived up to 80years old in 1980;and then another jw became anoited say at age of 20and lives up to 100 years old,then "this generation" would stretch to1980+80=2060.so the end would extend for another 50 years.

teel

So therefore, sometime after 2014 (who knows - perhaps 2020 or 2030) - when 1914 is well past 100 years in the past, they will update the date again.

Don't forget the 120 years of Noah. They might put more emphasis on that as we get closer to 2034. At around 2040 the date 1914 would sound so stupid they will have to do something about it, maybe dropping it, or simply de-emphasising it, mentioning less and less, and after 20 years from then they'll say it was the R&F's fault for misunderstanding.

25

DC 2010 Release - The Origin of Life and its many misquotes

by Designer Stubble in

i have just started working my way through the new publication the origin of life 5 questions worth asking.

it is completely appalling.

it is at the very most six grade level and just the first references i verified (which most dubs dont do) have been taken out of context, are completely misquoted or in the example of using the encyclopedia britannica a dated version is used rather than the most recent one, to align with what they want to write, rather than aligned with the newest research.. .

teel

That's very interresting Gladring, I don't think I heard that before. Anyone got any extra info? Thanks Gladring, you answered before I could even ask That link to the photodrama is enough proof. Ever thought of writing prophecies for the WT? You'd do a better job than the current employees.

Indeed, that disclaimer looks like they're preparing for the people saying it's full of misquotes.

25

DC 2010 Release - The Origin of Life and its many misquotes

by Designer Stubble in

i have just started working my way through the new publication the origin of life 5 questions worth asking.

it is completely appalling.

it is at the very most six grade level and just the first references i verified (which most dubs dont do) have been taken out of context, are completely misquoted or in the example of using the encyclopedia britannica a dated version is used rather than the most recent one, to align with what they want to write, rather than aligned with the newest research.. .

teel

Mad Sweeney: In case of JWs? I'd say pride. When Russel started the religion 130 years ago, evolution wasn't really hard to doubt, in fact most people doubted it. Then they got stuck with it, like with other beliefs they fought to keep, for example 1914. Some other religions have no problems at least flirting with the idea of "intelligent evolution" - evolution directed by God.

77

Generation - topic dedicated to debator

by teel in

there was a heated discussion between debator and a few others by hijacking this thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/194187/1.

i posted here every post on this subject, so you can continue the debate, and leave that thread to its original purpose.

hopefully i got all the relevant posts.

teel

--------------------------------

Up to this point was copy-paste. Now on with the schedule.

The important point is that it didn't make it into official doctrine simply because they were willing to be refined from this mistake.

Debator, are you implying the GB is not willing to be refined from their mistakes? That's why mistakes make it into JWs official doctrine? I'm not following you...

77

Generation - topic dedicated to debator

by teel in

there was a heated discussion between debator and a few others by hijacking this thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/194187/1.

i posted here every post on this subject, so you can continue the debate, and leave that thread to its original purpose.

hopefully i got all the relevant posts.

teel

debator:

Hi isaac

I will make one final point because you are misrepresenting the quoted words. "the Creator's promise of a peaceful and secure world" is a bible one from isaiah not from the witnesses. the 1914 is their deduction separated from this by the word "before" so the "Creators promise" only refers to the peaceful and secure world.

Ps I read deut 18 it is clearly refering to Inspired words from God only or false Gods. I am keeping this simple as the bible does you are the one trying to stretch beyond saying "You are saying you speak the inspired words from God himself" but enough of this let the reader use decernment on both our points of debate. It has been interesting Isaac

Thank you.

isaacaustin:

Addtional thoughts: Your qualifications as to what makes a false prophet go well beyond the BIble's simple and clear definition at Deut 18. You may need to review that.

isaacaustin:

Debator, why did you stop there? "the Creator's promise of a peaceful and secure world" Before the generation that saw the events of 1914 completely passes away. Those are not Isaiah's words. Anoter example of the org adding to the word of God. LOL

isaacaustin:

Debator said:

Hi isaac

I will make one final point because you are misrepresenting the quoted words. "the Creator's promise of a peaceful and secure world" is a bible one from isaiah not from the witnesses. the 1914 is their deduction separated from this by the word "before" so the "Creators promise" only refers to the peaceful and secure world.

My reply;

Not at all the case. A review of all WT material written till 95 shows the mags preaching the age of the 1914 generation as proof the end is near. "Creator's promise" absolutely does refer to the 1914 nonsense. Nice try, but an unsuccessful one.

isaacaustin:

Debator, are you an active JW? A former JW? A former study? What?

77

Generation - topic dedicated to debator

by teel in

there was a heated discussion between debator and a few others by hijacking this thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/194187/1.

i posted here every post on this subject, so you can continue the debate, and leave that thread to its original purpose.

hopefully i got all the relevant posts.

teel

teel:

Are you saying unless we can be perfectly accurate on biblical prophecies like Jesus's "generations" we should not use them?

debator, you know that almost all of the people on this forum were df'd, da'd, or similar because they didn't agree to some doctrine, right? Now, don't tell me that setting up a standard, on which people's eternal lives are judged upon (the general view is that the df'd has a very high chance of dying if he doesn't repent, much higher than any "worldly") - that these standards don't come from God, but imperfect men are trying to piece it together from the Bible. What? Don't judge others, lest you be judged?

Now, the way I see Christ's church is somewhat according to the principle "In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas" - unity in necessary things; liberty in doubtful things; charity in all things. "Generation" is doubtful - as it was proven time and again in the last century. Please allow me liberty to doubt it, without saying I'm not following God.

I also find tec's quote still very relevant - the WT currently says Jesus evidently meant that. They don't say that "we think he meant that". They're putting words in Jesus' mouth. An evident thing should not change every 10 years or so. If the GB is truly humble as you say, then let them show their humility by saying that these interpretations are only how they see what the Bible means - it might not be from God, we might be wrong, but we're pretty sure Jesus meant this you brothers do as you please. This is exactly what Paul did in tec's quote - I guess he wasn't humble enough like our great leaders, huh?

AnnOMaly:

Thats exactly my point the Apostles got Jesus words wrong and spread it among themselves until Jesus had to refine them from this mistake. The bible makes it clear they did have access to holy spirit at this time often sent out by Jesus to heal and preach with spirit help. According to the reasonings on here that should stop them for making this type of mistake. but it didn't

No, my point was simply that the 'word' that went out did not become official Christian 'didache' or doctrine or dogma. And the NT doesn't say anything about Jesus refining them from this mistake. It only comes up as an historical narrative in John's gospel - that's it.

Anyhoo, out of consideration for nicolaou 's thread, I'll end the discussion on this right here.

isaacaustin:

Debator said:

Hi AnnOMaly

Thats exactly my point the Apostles got Jesus words wrong and spread it among themselves until Jesus had to refine them from this mistake. The bible makes it clear they did have access to holy spirit at this time often sent out by Jesus to heal and preach with spirit help. According to the reasonings on here that should stop them for making this type of mistake. but it didn't

My reply:

Did the Apostles spread, publish and make mandatory that all followers must accept what they believed Jesus meant? No. And please direct me to a verse where they spread/published their ideas as from God, similar to how the org called the end coming before 1914 'the Creator's promise'. The apostles did not do that. They simply asked Jesus IF he was restoring the kigdom to Israel at this time. BIG difference.

Debator said:

Some of you mention 1914

This is a date derived from Bible chronology not God directly. It comes from "times, time and half" prophecy in the bible and is further calculated using Bible indicators on time "day for year" etc. Since I can source it directly to bible Chronology there is no way they are claiming Godly inspiration for this so it is simply a current understanding from Bible-based Chronology. Again is bible chronology a lie and not to be used?

My reply: Not exactly Bible chronology, but man's interpetation of unrelated texts. They then crossed over into prophecy by calling it "the creators promise", the same as Hananiah the false prophet took God's words and put his own time constraints onto when it would happen and stamped God's name on it. Bible chronology is not a lie, the WT's interpetation of it is.

Was this 1914 generation teaching that remained in effect until 1995 a false prophecy?

The GB took Jesus words and put a time constraint on which Jesus words had to happen, they published this repeatedly and made it mandatory that all members must accept and preach this. Is there a Bible precedent to this?

Jeremiah 28 1 In the fifth month of that same year, the fourth year, early in the reign of Zedekiah king of Judah, the prophet Hananiah son of Azzur, who was from Gibeon, said to me in the house of the LORD in the presence of the priests and all the people: 2 "This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: 'I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon. 3 Within two years I will bring back to this place all the articles of the LORD's house that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon removed from here and took to Babylon. 4 I will also bring back to this place Jehoiachin [a] son of Jehoiakim king of Judah and all the other exiles from Judah who went to Babylon,' declares the LORD, 'for I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon.' "

So Hananaiah is restating what the Lord said, but putting a time constraint on when it will happen, and calling it the words of the Lord, or 'the Creator's promise'.

What happened?

Jer 28 15 Then the prophet Jeremiah said to Hananiah the prophet, "Listen, Hananiah! The LORD has not sent you, yet you have persuaded this nation to trust in lies. 16 Therefore, this is what the LORD says: 'I am about to remove you from the face of the earth. This very year you are going to die, because you have preached rebellion against the LORD.' "

17 In the seventh month of that same year, Hananiah the prophet died.

This mistake, or misinterpreation by Hananiah that was in need of severe refining, defined him as a false prophet in the eyes of God. Did the GB persuade 6 million members to believe in lies?? I think it is obvious.

Debator said:

You are all accusing them of being false prophets yet they have not claimed one single word of inspiration from God! They have not claimed to do one single sign from God! They have not claimed to do one single miracle from God!

My reply: They do not have to. They have claimed to be God's channel of truth, they have made claims as being 'the Creator's promise'..something paralleled in the Bible. The case of Hananiah clearly shows the GB to be a false prophet.

77

Generation - topic dedicated to debator

by teel in

there was a heated discussion between debator and a few others by hijacking this thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/194187/1.

i posted here every post on this subject, so you can continue the debate, and leave that thread to its original purpose.

hopefully i got all the relevant posts.

teel

debator:

Hi annOMaly

The historical account of the mistake made by the apostles shows by inference that Jesus needed to clarify that he meant "He could if he wanted too" not that he would. so they clearly must have needed refining on this and the inference is that it was Jesus that corrected them. So I think my point remains valid. It also doesn't change the fact that they could and did make mistakes while having access to "spirit" and they didn't get condemned for this. The important point is that it didn't make it into official doctrine simply because they were willing to be refined from this mistake. Again I quote Daniel.

Daniel 11:35
Some of the wise will stumble, so that they may be refined, purified and made spotless until the time of the end, for it will still come at the appointed time.

Mistakes will happen but what makes the wise stand out is that they are willing to be refined from them. It doesn't say we won't make mistkes. Like I said It is a false expectation to expect perfection ATM. And since you are willing to accept mistakes in the apostles that they got refined from but not the witnesses then your bias against the witnesses shows.

Hi Isaac

You can twist those scriptures all you like but my original point stands. They are clearly refering to Hananaiah saying he has had a message FROM GOD DIRECTLY! he was saying this was an INSPIRED expression From God. "This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says"

Jehovah's witnesses have never claimed inspired message from God as Hananaiah clearly did and was condemned for completely.

Using Bible chronology is an established Bible practise and was the reason why people were expecting the messiah in Jesus's time and why they fled to the hills after seeing the signs fulfilled that they were warned about. There is no condemnation in using actual Bible chronology and if some mistake is made in understanding on this, then time itself will refine them. If you are saying it is wrong to calculate bible chronology from the bible as written by biblical prophets that doesn't make sense? Are you are saying God inspired chronological prophecy to trap us? Or that it shouldn't be used?

You are still trying to use the word "lies" on this when clearly the understanding on "generation" was one they themselves believed. A lie is a deliberate falsehood on the part of the liar not a mistaken understanding they themselves believe.

The bible clearly indicates what is meant by "false prophecy" and it has to be an "Inspired " expression said to be directly from Jehovah. Not jesus or elijah or moses but Jehovah God himself supposedly speaking the words directly to them as Hananaiah claimed. If you want to stretch this to intepretation/understanding drawn from Already written Bible prophecy and chronology by Ancient writters, that is your perogative but you have no Biblical principle for this. The scripture you show disproves your point since it indicates Hananaiah is claiming to have had inspired words from God himself.

Jesus himself said we should decern/interpret/understand bible prophecy so as to be "ready" and "on watch" he put no "get this perfect or else" tag on it. Just that we would get help and the light would be brighter as we relied on Jehovah, his spirit and his word the bible for understanding. Which indicates an ongoing process of refinement.

I think you have made your mind up about the witnesses Isaac and while I respect your right to your viewpoint I cannot agree with it.

I think I have taking this point as far as it will go and am only repeating myself now. So forgive me if I no longer reply.

isaacaustin:

Debator said:

Hi Isaac

You can twist those scriptures all you like but my original point stands. They are clearly refering to Hananaiah saying he has had a message FROM GOD DIRECTLY! he was saying this was an INSPIRED expression From God. "This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says"

My reply: And the Wt said that their magazine "builds confidence in the Creator's promise of a peaceful and secure world before the generation that saw the events of 1914 completely passes away." Calling something the "Creators promise" is the same as saying God said it.

isaacaustin:

Debator said:

Hi annOMaly

The historical account of the mistake made by the apostles shows by inference that Jesus needed to clarify that he meant "He could if he wanted too" not that he would. so they clearly must have needed refining on this and the inference is that it was Jesus. So I think my point remains valid. It also doesn't change the fact that they could and did make mistakes while having access to "spirit" and they didn't get condemned for this. The important point IS that it didn't make it into official doctrine simply becasue they were willing to be refined from this mistake. Again I quote Daniel.

My reply:

Irrelevant. The Apostle asked a question. They also made mistakes. They did not stamp their wrong ideas as coming from God, the WT did...black and white in print.

77

Generation - topic dedicated to debator

by teel in

there was a heated discussion between debator and a few others by hijacking this thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/194187/1.

i posted here every post on this subject, so you can continue the debate, and leave that thread to its original purpose.

hopefully i got all the relevant posts.

teel

palmtree67:

"spirit-inspired"........"spirit-directed".........

Either way, they claim to be God's only spokesman on earth.

It's not fair to claim to be God's spokesman, then when your predictions don't come true, laugh and say "Haha! We never claimed to be perfect!"

tec:

Concerning spirit directed vs. spirit inspired:

Paul knew that people considered him as inspired; that they would listen to his commands and hang on to his words as if they were from God. So Paul seemed to be very careful with how he worded things, and he did not abuse the trust given him. When something came from him, and not from God, he made certain to clarify that.

1Corinthian 7: 12 - To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord)...

At the end of his spiel he tells people that he thinks that he, too, has the Spirit of God. But he sill made sure that he made the distinction when speaking from himself.

Tammy

debator:

Hi tec

So do the witnesses, they make sure that it is clear they do not have the ability to be inspired by God in this time and they give all credit to Jehovah through his son Jesus. I think people confuse humility and giving credit to Jehovah for claiming personal glory. I do not see this.

1 Peter 4:11
If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. To him be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen.

Having confidence in your faith and God is not a bad thing. Paul told Caesar Agrippa he should become a Christian (then a united group of one people) according to some on here Paul would have been wrong to give christianity that much credit as God's people. It is tempting to think the multi-doctrinal and divisioned christianity we have now is the norm but this is not what we should be like. We should be one people with one message and one God and have confidence in that.

I think people are also quibbling at obedience to shepherds but the bible is very clear on this in a number of scriptures.

1 Peter 5:2
Be shepherds of God's flock that is under your care, serving as overseers—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve;

and we pick overseers from among ourselves (even though we are imperfect).

Titus 1:7
Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain.

Like I said I find accusations against witnesses on here that are uniquely put on them but on no other Christian people, either early first century ones or modern ones. People seem to want to ask an extraordinary unrealistic perfection from witnesses.

On generations.

Why are people so hung up on the Biblical generation prophecy? Prophecy is by nature subjective until fulfillment. we are told to use understanding/discernment on it.

Mark 13:14 (New International Version - UK)

14 When you see 'the abomination that causes desolation' standing where it does not belong— let the reader understand— then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains

Why would they be 100% perfectly accurate on reading prophecy? This is impossible unless you are Jehovah who himself beyond even his son knows fully the timetable? All we can do is use prophecy as best as we can decern and work out. But we should still use the prophecies to work things out. It is why we are given prophecies.

To everyone I ask,

Are you saying unless we can be perfectly accurate on biblical prophecies like Jesus's "generations" we should not use them?

Thank you for your reply Tec