Mad Sweeney

Joined

• started 145 topics
• posted 7,099 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Mad Sweeney

• 
  6

  Visual Bible, Matthew

  by possible-san in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  when i was an active jw, i liked this movie.. and i liked this jesus.. 1:1 - 2:10. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noorjm13tuu.

  2:11 - 3:15. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kal1zprd4ew.

  3:16 - 5:10. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzaopig57v0.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Thank you for posting these, possible-san. I will try to view them when I have time.
• 
  62

  Can You Get DFd for Working for the Department of Defense?

  by daniel-p in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so, as some of you may be aware, i got a job offer with an agency under the u.s. department of defense.

  the other day i told a member of my family, and they nearly went apeshit.. my question: what reprecussions could this reasonably have?

  does the wts speak of this in any of their publications?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Just to clarify the primary question of this thread:

  You can get DFd for ANYTHING because they can consider your attitude in their decision.
• 
  110

  An Explanation of why TIME TRAVEL does not work

  by Terry in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  energy and matter are neither created nor destroyed.. consequently, the building blocks of existence are actually finite parts.. to create things in "tomorrow" which are new, something has to be dismantled to leave spare parts for tomorrow's new thing.. the old thing deteriorates, (dies/disintegrates) and the parts become available to make the new thing.. time travel requires going to a place where today's parts are available to be rearranged.. some of today's things persist as they are, of course.

  they only travel through time by persisting as they are.

  (mountains, for example.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  To get the energy needed to create matter, one would need a LOT of other matter, and then the new matter would STILL be made from OLD matter. Therefore, until we can create energy without using any matter (impossible in this universe; we'd need to find another) we won't be able to create any new matter.

  As for what God is made out of, either he exists outside this universe and is made of something we can't possibly identify or he exists inside every single part of this universe in some way that is almost as difficult to identify. If he's made of just some of the matter and/or energy within this universe but not all of it, he's not really much of a god because his omnipresence and omnipotence are then ruined.
• 
  110

  An Explanation of why TIME TRAVEL does not work

  by Terry in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  energy and matter are neither created nor destroyed.. consequently, the building blocks of existence are actually finite parts.. to create things in "tomorrow" which are new, something has to be dismantled to leave spare parts for tomorrow's new thing.. the old thing deteriorates, (dies/disintegrates) and the parts become available to make the new thing.. time travel requires going to a place where today's parts are available to be rearranged.. some of today's things persist as they are, of course.

  they only travel through time by persisting as they are.

  (mountains, for example.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Sylvia, space is indeed mostly nothing. There are particles and things out there undiscovered certainly but most of it is void. (Unless you believe the voids are full of Eldilia.)
• 
  68

  Would you be shattered if your mate had sex with someone else? Why?

  by goldensky in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  please don't say, "yes, for obvious reasons".. it's not obvious to me..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Here's a possible monkey wrench:

  What if the entire concept is less about right and wrong and more about possessiveness and ego? It isn't that "she cheated" it is that "she cheated ON ME."

  Men, ask yourselves: What if the shoe was on the other foot, which it often is? What if she cheated WITH ME, ON HIM (whoever that guy might be)? Would I hold her in the same contempt? Why not? A cheater's a cheater right? From what I've seen that's not the case; many happily married couples are THE RESULT of one of them cheating WITH their current spouse ON a previous partner.

  The above could also probably apply to women but since I'm not one, I'm not even going to attempt to project. Perhaps a female could comment on the applicability.
• 
  13

  The Governing Body Fear The Proliferation of XJW and JW Internet Discussion Groups

  by frankiespeakin in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  as the number of xjws grow and they post on different discussion groups, in all the different languages,, this must strike many of the governing body with terror, that is if any of them use the internet, and for all we know they all may have their head so far up their ass that they stay off the net, being old and set in their ways, but there might be a few who do surf the net, hey they may even enjoy a little porno too while there at it.. so perhaps the real old geezers don't go on the net,, being even too feeble to punch the key or see any purpose to it and so the internet remains a big mystery to them because they just don't get it.. those in the legal department at bethel probably do more internet stuff and perhaps they keep the real dumb gb abreast of things from time to time in language their dried out low functioning brains can grasp.. so depending on how up to date the individual governing body member is with the power and uses of the internet, to that extent they fear the proliferation.

  the governing body fears their being exposed to the world and its members, that fear increases as we increase and the internet grows and becomes more common through out the world.. fear of this world exposure will make the governing body make less and less trips to different branches because there is so much dirt on these guys passing around all over the internet they don't know which branch members are reading this stuff.

  i'm sure they are not the big hit they once were before the net and it can only get worse and worse..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  The current GB isn't as old as you might think. There are what, just two legitimate geezers left? The rest range from their 50s to 70s, IIRC. That said, they aren't in charge. They're a front for the corporations. In exchange for taking the ridicule for the borg's ridiculous policies, they get the glory and credit from the rank and file. In the meantime the lawyers and executives of the corporations live in security and obscurity simultaneously.
• 
  122

  Me, the WT, and the "Separating Work"...

  by AGuest in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  may you all have peace!.

  a little while ago a dear one referred to my trip to "bethel" and discussion with carey barber.

  he asked if he could read them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  He died in 2005 or 2006 I think.

  You're probably thinking of Barr, who is now about 97 or 98 and likely the next to go.

  Thanks. My bad on that. Barr...Barber. That's too close for comfort.
• 
  110

  An Explanation of why TIME TRAVEL does not work

  by Terry in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  energy and matter are neither created nor destroyed.. consequently, the building blocks of existence are actually finite parts.. to create things in "tomorrow" which are new, something has to be dismantled to leave spare parts for tomorrow's new thing.. the old thing deteriorates, (dies/disintegrates) and the parts become available to make the new thing.. time travel requires going to a place where today's parts are available to be rearranged.. some of today's things persist as they are, of course.

  they only travel through time by persisting as they are.

  (mountains, for example.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  It will be interesting to see where this thread goes. I don't believe in traveling backwards in time, either, but there seems to be something missing in your explanation. I haven't put my finger on it yet, though.

  Time travel forward is a different kettle of fish altogether.
• 
  89

  I am having some reservations about Barbara Anderson

  by JWoods in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  recently, there was a very nice thread in which one of our posters apologized for having the temerity to challenge barbara anderson.. i thought it was very nice to see that they made up and put the personal stuff aside.. however, i felt the need to call it like i really feel it - i was very put off by the barbara anderson reply in which she plugged her new promotional meeting.

  it brought back memories of that horrid little affair from a couple of years back when she kept posting up "the greatest new thing about blood which will bring down the watchtower society is just around the corner -- and i could tell you but then i would have to kill you, etc."..

  just like another jehovah's witnesses prophecy about the coming of the lord in our time.. i am beginning to wonder if perhaps the siren song of self-promotion is getting a little too strong for real life.. ok. i said it.. james - and saying it was not the easiest thing that i have ever done.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  My point was, and remains, that starting sensational rumors and doing constant self-promotion really does no good service to the exJW community.

  Which is an excellent point. There's just no need to name names, IMO, since the point applies to anyone and everyone. Also, most of us here are sharp enough to know who to apply it to at any given time.
• 
  68

  Would you be shattered if your mate had sex with someone else? Why?

  by goldensky in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  please don't say, "yes, for obvious reasons".. it's not obvious to me..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  "Shattered" is a strong word. I would be disappointed but much would depend on how she did it and what she planned to do in the future. Was it just a matter of circumstance and loss of control? Was it a calculated one-time fling? Was it part of a greater affair, a relationship with the dude? Does she want or expect my forgiveness? Does she want to continue the marriage? Does she want the marriage to continue as it did, or does she want an "open" marriage from here on? Am I now allowed a free fling to even the score?

  Lots of questions need to be answered before I decide how to react.