if the bible says anything; it says what it says.. what is said doesn't change because nobody is continuing to write it.. the bible cannot change, then.. god's word (if that is what the bible is) doesn't change.however, if any person or group interprets the bible's doctrines and the doctrines change, then,it must be the interpreter who is in error.. (i call it "error" because; why change it otherwise?).
who would have enough hubris to risk representing god's word one way---and declare it truth--only to change that truth into something else?.
answer: the watchtower society!.
I liked how Fred Franz put it in his 1984 talk "Decisions".
First he said how glad he was, pre-1914, to read a little booklet on what happens to the dead. He said he "found the truth!"
Then later in the talk he said, in regards to the finished Mystery "It was not the truth". Then he discounted all the literature up to that time as not being the truth.
if the bible says anything; it says what it says.. what is said doesn't change because nobody is continuing to write it.. the bible cannot change, then.. god's word (if that is what the bible is) doesn't change.however, if any person or group interprets the bible's doctrines and the doctrines change, then,it must be the interpreter who is in error.. (i call it "error" because; why change it otherwise?).
who would have enough hubris to risk representing god's word one way---and declare it truth--only to change that truth into something else?.
answer: the watchtower society!.
"Truth". A "loaded-language" synonym for "Theory".
A good scientist builds his theory on all the known facts at the time. He adapts/trashes/changes his theories as new facts come to light.
Most religious "Truths" are built on facts that confirm what a person or group has established that they will believe, to the exclusion of opposing facts. Part of the problem lies in that many of the "facts" are in fact unprovable assumptions. Sometimes the evidence is so strong to show that the "truth" is not true, that the "truth" must change.
The difference between a "truth" and "theory" is that you can question a theory and improve on the theory, but you cannot question a "truth" without the threat of disfellowshipping/shunning (unless you recant your position). By calling the "theory" a "truth", you instill raise the barrier for questions, ie "why are you challenging what is known to be true?" Ironically, the leaders are allowed to change the "truth" at any time because they define what the "truth" is.
in january 2009 i was disfellowshipped from jw's.
i documented the whole process and recorded it which you can find here:- death or obedience.
many people asked for english transcripts of these recordings and i'm pleased to say i now have full transcripts kindly supplied anonymously for those who wish to read them.. these will be of great help to those who have trouble hearing or cannot understand the scottish accents on the recordings.. they are available here:- the trial of a jehovah's witness the new site has it's own audio link for each transcript so you can listen along as you read.. the person who has supplied me is interested in the moral and ethical issues this case has thrown up.
Thanks Hobo Ken. If I ever have a shepherding visit, I'll know to keep my mouth shut!
i used to always justify that the apostles (and paul) thought the end was near because the "mini-end" (jerusalem's destruction in 70ce) had not yet happened.. then it dawned on me that 1st/2nd/3rd john were written in 98ce (at least according to the back of my nwt), after jerusalem's destruction.. 1 john 2:18 (new international version)warnings against denying the son 18 dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come.
this is how we know it is the last hour.. not only was it the last day, it was the last hour..
Thanks Leolaia for the input!
another thread got me to thinking..something i do once in a while .
what if no one believed in a god .
what do you think the world would be like?.
Countless civilizations have been wiped off the map due to relgious zealotism.
But how many of those times was religion an excuse, rather than a cause?
i used to always justify that the apostles (and paul) thought the end was near because the "mini-end" (jerusalem's destruction in 70ce) had not yet happened.. then it dawned on me that 1st/2nd/3rd john were written in 98ce (at least according to the back of my nwt), after jerusalem's destruction.. 1 john 2:18 (new international version)warnings against denying the son 18 dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come.
this is how we know it is the last hour.. not only was it the last day, it was the last hour..
Leolaia, do you like the entire "Word Biblical Commentary" series? Or is it mainly the Revelation one in that series that you favor?
trinkets like these make me want to .
when you carry the bible, satan gets a headache; when you open it, he collapses; when he sees you reading it he faints; when he sees you are living what you read, he flees!!
and when you are about to re-post this message, he will try and discourage you ... i defeated him!!
Facebook doesn't make witnesses more nutty.
Cognitive-dissonance and independent-thinking-discouraged makes a witness more nutty (if you don't use your nuts, they shrink).
i'm curious to what the lurkers think of this guy?
have you read a lot of his posts?
do you think he makes good points?
I like djeggnog because he is not afraid/unable to read/debate opposing points of view. Sure, he's a JW, but he is one with wide eyes open and awareness of the facts, so all the power to him.
He's also the only one who pointed out some faulty logic I used when analyzing an article. Debate can help to strengthen logical reasoning.
another thread got me to thinking..something i do once in a while .
what if no one believed in a god .
what do you think the world would be like?.
A world with Secular Humanism. What would it be like?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism
Secular Humanism describes a world view with the following elements and principles: [ 3 ]
A Secular Humanist Declaration was issued in 1980 by The Council for Democratic and Secular Humanism (CODESH), now the Council for Secular Humanism (CSH). It lays out ten ideals: Free inquiry as opposed to censorship and imposition of belief; separation of church and state; the ideal of freedom from religious control and from jingoistic government control; ethics based on critical intelligence rather than that deduced from religious belief; moral education; religious skepticism; reason; a belief in science and technology as the best way of understanding the world; evolution; and education as the essential method of building humane, free, and democratic societies. [ 4 ]
i am at a point where i tend to think all religions are rubbish.
the bible is not a book to lead one's life by and not deserving of much respect.
if jesus existed then the gospels are not an accurate picture of his life and even if the non-supernatural elements resembled a real person there is much to repudiate as there is to admire.. so what about comparing jehovah's witnesses to other faiths?
If a religion uses blackmail to keep you in (ie. your family will shun you), stifles discussion that could contradict with official policy, and makes people throw away the future based on the leaders theories (end is coming!), but then it doesn't, that is not healthy.
Mind you, as I type this I find it ironic because I could say the same things of the 1st C. Christians (The apostles kept saying the end is soon, you were not supposed to listen to those who preach that Jesus was not raised from the dead). At least it doesn't seem they shunned people when they left though...
