Posts by poor places

35

Will only "incorrigibly wicked" people be destroyed at Armageddon?

by poor places in

jw
friends

in a recent talk that i heard, a brother tried to comfort those whose family members have left jehovah's witnesses.

he did so by saying that only "incorrigibly wicked" people will be destroyed at armageddon.

i found his line of reasoning refreshing, especially in comparison with the usual fear-mongering in wt publications.

poor places

Thanks for your helpful and informative replies. Thanks especially to Leaving WT for supplying a ton of quotes! I had never realized what a hard-line stance the WT organization takes on Armageddon. I was under the apparently false impression that at different times, they'd said that people who have never been preached to will survive. But those quotes are clear.

I think that my confusion came from misunderstandings of WT doctrine by other JWs. On several occasions, I've heard from JWs that Jehovah will let those who haven't heard the good news live through Armageddon. And just a few weeks ago, I heard this brother say that only the "incorrigibly wicked" will be destroyed. It's clear that many JWs (including me, although I don't believe anymore) don't have a strong grasp of WT doctrine. It's probably worth asking why these doctrines aren't more clear in believers' minds. Do they block out the real, awful doctrine and replace it with a more pleasant version? Does the WT intentionally obscure their views on Armageddon by rarely bringing them up? It's really hard to say.

I'm also amazed that the WT comes right out and says that infants WILL DIE at Armageddon because of the sins of their parents. Yet we are supposed to believe that God is love? What kind of mind does it take to believe that God is loving and that he will slay innocent infants? A brainwashed mind.

35

Will only "incorrigibly wicked" people be destroyed at Armageddon?

by poor places in

jw
friends

in a recent talk that i heard, a brother tried to comfort those whose family members have left jehovah's witnesses.

he did so by saying that only "incorrigibly wicked" people will be destroyed at armageddon.

i found his line of reasoning refreshing, especially in comparison with the usual fear-mongering in wt publications.

poor places

In a recent talk that I heard, a brother tried to comfort those whose family members have left Jehovah's Witnesses. He did so by saying that only "incorrigibly wicked" people will be destroyed at Armageddon. I found his line of reasoning refreshing, especially in comparison with the usual fear-mongering in WT publications.

But I'm not sure if what this brother said accords with WT doctrine or not. Through years of mostly not paying attention at the meetings and browsing the magazines, my impression has been that the society's explanation of who will die at Armageddon is muddled. I don't think they've ever said outright that Jehovah's Witnesses are the only people who will survive Armageddon, but I also know that they don't want to give people the impression that any good person will survive.

I don't have access to WT Library at the moment, so I was wondering if anyone knows what the current official WT viewpoint is on who will die at Armageddon. The only reason I care is that I may have to defend my lack of belief pretty soon. We'll see. Thanks in advance if anyone is able to provide information on this question.

3

Zen Living part 23 (summarized): Loving Kindness: What the World Needs Now

by JimmyPage in

jw
friends

love really is the answer.

zen living reveals that loving kindness, compassion, and the desire to relieve the suffering of others emerge naturally from a zen practice.. as the world experiences struggle, conflict, and pain, zen living can teach those who practice it how to release fear, hate, and the delusion of difference.. loving kindness can heal emotional, political, social, and spiritual separation.. we can help spread strength, power, and unity through loving kindness by practicing mindfulness every day.. .

poor places

Jimmy Page,

I find your post extremely interesting because I've been reading up on Buddhism a bit lately. I've read a book called The Modern Buddhist Bible and a couple of books by the Dalai Lama. And I agree with a lot of what is written in these books. It seems that Buddhism is about transforming one's mind to develop compassion and love, while rooting out negative qualities like hate and jealousy.

My question for you is about practicing Buddhism. How can I start developing more compassion in my life through Buddhist practices? What is a good way for me to start? The books I've read mention meditation as a key to developing these qualities more fully, but I don't really know how to meditate. Do you recommend attending a Buddhist center and meditating with a group? Do you think it's possible to develop these qualities by meditating alone? I'm kind of in the dark about what to do. I would just like to become a more loving person, but I don't seem to be making much progress by myself. Thank you in advance for any suggestions.

17

"The Bible is Not a Book. It's a Library."

by leavingwt in

jw
friends

i would like to call your attention to this recent article by karl giberson, ph.d., scholar of science & religion, and the former president of the biologos foundation.

his conclusion is that we need not dismiss all of the bible, just because some of it is not accurate.

.. but how do we decide which parts of the bible should be read literally?

poor places

Interesting stuff. To me, the better question is this: what is the benefit of taking the Bible literally? A person could find comfort in many scriptures, but what about the passages about eternal burning and God destroying people, etc? So I guess that the scholars could spend their time figuring out which books of the Bible are most likely to be accurate (I'm sure they've already calculated the odds), but is there a point to it?

41

A Sincere Questions for Current/Former WTBTS Elders/Pioneers...

by AGuest in

jw
friends

may you all have peace!.

i would like to know something, if you will indulge me, please - thank you!

to what extent did you, as a jw... read/know the contents of the bible?

poor places

During my pioneer years (late teens into early twenties), I probably read the Bible twice. I'm not sure that I would call myself a serious student at that time; I was just someone who found the Bible interesting. Except for the boring parts. And good God, are some parts of the Bible boring! Not to mention totally irrelevant to life today (I'm thinking of most of Leviticus as a prime example). Isn't it strange that God inspired a book with so many parts that are irrelevant and uninteresting to people today? Shouldn't he have had the foresight to include what is necessary and leave out long and tedious lists of names? Sorry, I'm digressing a little.

126

A simple way to tell God probably doesn't exist

by poor places in

when's the last time you prayed to god?

did he respond?

i prayed to him for years and years and received no response.

poor places

Chariklo,

It isn't as simple as God simply saying no to one of my requests for a sign. Sure, I'm one puny human being. My point is that if God exists (especially the omnipotent God presented to us by religion), it is impossible to explain why he wouldn't help those who are suffering. It is impossible to explain why he didn't stop the Holocaust, for example. Go ahead, try to explain it. And the explanation that God works in mysterious ways isn't satisfactory; people are suffering right now and don't need mystery, they need help. The explanation that God's purpose will be revealed is also unsatisfactory; people are suffering now, and they don't need God's purpose later, and He should be able to see that. The Witnesses have their own theory, and it makes God look awfully selfish.

Here are your main options: If God is omnipotent and isn't doing anything about suffering, he doesn't care. Or, he isn't powerful enough to stop suffering, in which case he is weak. This argument is nothing new. I forget which writer made it a long time ago. I'm just saying that there isn't any answer to it.

126

A simple way to tell God probably doesn't exist

by poor places in

when's the last time you prayed to god?

did he respond?

i prayed to him for years and years and received no response.

poor places

Breakfast,

Thanks for tip on Mark Vonnegut. I'm going to check him out.

And yeah, I'm a big Wilco fan. You too? Poor Places is one of my favorites.

126

A simple way to tell God probably doesn't exist

by poor places in

when's the last time you prayed to god?

did he respond?

i prayed to him for years and years and received no response.

poor places

Breakfast of Champions,

I'm a Vonnegut fan and I love the quote. His books offer much-needed comic relief for those who have been oppressed by religion. Especially Cat's Cradle, for me. I take it Breakfast of Champions is your favorite?

126

A simple way to tell God probably doesn't exist

by poor places in

when's the last time you prayed to god?

did he respond?

i prayed to him for years and years and received no response.

poor places

Sabastious,

I'm not saying that just because God doesn't give me a sign, I don't believe in him. I'm saying that I don't believe in him because he doesn't give a lot of people a sign. There are tons of believers who have to struggle with their faith because they haven't been given a sign. If the God of the scriptures exists, his existence should be obvious. Then everyone would believe in him, and there wouldn't be conflicts between Christians and Muslims, etc. He should be telling us directly what he wants. Again, if he was omnipotent, why wouldn't he? I feel like this is an unanswerable question for believers.

126

A simple way to tell God probably doesn't exist

by poor places in

when's the last time you prayed to god?

did he respond?

i prayed to him for years and years and received no response.

poor places

@ Moshe,

I've never heard of the Heisenberg principle, but I guess that's one way of justifying God's silence. If He was omnipotent, though, wouldn't He be able to deal with electron problems and give a simple sign? He's the one who created electrons, right? Of course, this is from a believer's point of view. As an unbeliever, I can see what you're saying.

@ Sizemilk,

Exactly. You would expect God to be the most consistent creature of all time. But at some point, he stopped communicating with people. Why? Why wouldn't he communicate regularly with Jehovah's Witnesses if they were the only true religion? The Governing Body should be able to write Watchtower articles telling about conversations with God, but they don't, because he doesn't communicate with them or anyone else.