Posts by alice.in.wonderland

22

Liberal or Conservative?

by alice.in.wonderland in

liberal or conservative?.

i see myself as a moderate, not just because of political neutrality but because the two ideologies have their strengths and inherit weaknesses.. http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/.

conservatives - believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional american values and a strong national defense.

alice.in.wonderland

StAnn should meet Paul59:

Believe Out Loud | HoustonBelief

You no doubt have a Church of your own in Missouri City; but, sometime when you are visiting your Grandparents, I would invite you to visit the 11:00 Sunday Mass at St Anne’s—the liturgy is inspiring, the architecture is comfortable, and the people there are wonderful. (I always sit in the pew behind the St Paul Pier on the Westheimer side of the altar, although I am sick right now and not always there.) I am a very Traditional Catholic; but, as well as Traditionalists, the congregation includes a mixture of Progressives, who run the place—all of us drawn from a diverse population that are attracted to the Church, both from within the parish situated in River Oaks and from surrounding areas, plus all over the city. Nobody cares whether you are rich or poor. I see a lot of young people going to Communion every Sunday and am reassured that the Church has a future. Posted by Paul59

98

Blood Fractions

by alice.in.wonderland in

someone is pressing me about blood fractions on an unrelated thread, so i just moved the topic to an appropriate location.. "the point for me in every thread you touch is your sickening dishonesty and nauseating apologies for the old men in brooklyn who tell you what to do.. they have told you that products made from blood don't use blood, and you are so corrupt and gullible you just accept it.".

i accept any bible-based religion that adheres to the bible as its authority.. the purpose of this magazine, the watchtower, is to honor jehovah god, the supreme ruler of the universe.

just as watchtowers in ancient times enabled a person to observe developments from afar, so this magazine shows us the significance of world events in the light of bible prophecies.

alice.in.wonderland

"Recently, he/she/it was posting under the name "Consfearacy" and claiming to be a man.....so who knows??

Agreed on the "mixed up" part."

Consfearacy didn't receive any tasteless offensive sexist remarks or PMs from forum members who claim to be men.

29

November 2010 Awake! about "new atheism"

by processor in

what's actually the difference between this .... .

... and this picture?.

why is this marcher evil .... .

alice.in.wonderland

You didn't challenge any textual points from the new Awake!, you just posted some unrelated pictures.

On atheism: we can have more than the usual amount of trust in the scientific body of knowledge because we know it is self-correcting and millions of people are inspecting its recesses looking for something wrong, so that they can make a name for themselves. Evolution isn't an integral part of this body of knowledge. When it comes to this metaphysical subject; the cautious, skeptical and intellectually careful become a bunch of people dogmatically asserting something happened and is still happening when the facts clearly indicate otherwise. Physical reality in itself does not actually show signs of a God as explained by well-known human tendencies, science discovers a world of magnificent order, a universe that contains distinctive marks of intelligent design. We can disprove every God who is defined as omnipotent but not capable and desirous of preventing evil. The God of the Bible values free will and the prevention of evil. The God of the Bible as defined in Christendom's churches lives on only in the minds of believers until they're completely overcome by doubt. This has resulted in an increase of disbelief, because to think God is incapable of using his incredible powers for only his own improvement is highly disappointing. To those who accept this, it is a shame to see such limited/restricted thinking from a theist.

I don't think people can "intend" God one way or the other. For those who do not believe God exists, we are not in a godless society whether you know it or not.

That is why, since we have this ministry according to the mercy that was shown us, we do not give up; but we have renounced the underhanded things of which to be ashamed, not walking with cunning, neither adulterating the word of God, but by making the truth manifest recommending ourselves to every human conscience in the sight of God. If, now, the good news we declare is in fact veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through. 2 Corinthians 4:1-4

98

Blood Fractions

by alice.in.wonderland in

someone is pressing me about blood fractions on an unrelated thread, so i just moved the topic to an appropriate location.. "the point for me in every thread you touch is your sickening dishonesty and nauseating apologies for the old men in brooklyn who tell you what to do.. they have told you that products made from blood don't use blood, and you are so corrupt and gullible you just accept it.".

i accept any bible-based religion that adheres to the bible as its authority.. the purpose of this magazine, the watchtower, is to honor jehovah god, the supreme ruler of the universe.

just as watchtowers in ancient times enabled a person to observe developments from afar, so this magazine shows us the significance of world events in the light of bible prophecies.

alice.in.wonderland

"The JW teaching on blood is for want of a better analogy like a child's tricycle. While the larger wheel rests upon scripture, the two smaller wheels rest upon science and medicine. Without the (alleged) support provided by the two smaller "wheels," the purely religious notion that God forbids the eating of blood does not have anything at all to do with transfusion and the entire structure topples over.
But how is my 90 year old grandmother ( a devout JW ) going to understand fully the decision she is making with regard to blood fractions?
Obviously she can't The same goes for my wife's aged parents. That sort of dilemma is exactly what I was alluding to when I pointed out that there is no visible difference between the administration of an albumin solution and plasma. Understanding a distinction that minute would require reading and understanding an entire chapter on blood in a college level primer on human physiology.
For the apologist, this is really a no-win situation and I'm sympathetic to a point. Attempting to legitimize the idea that blood as a substance is the real issue when we're allowed to eat red bone marrow and that there are more leukocytes in colostrum than there are in circulating blood, requires that the apologist find some sort of scientific distinction to hang their hat on.
Yet the more estoteric and technical the discussion becomes, the more painfully obvious it is to all that the autonomy of the average JW patient is a lie. The ability to understand the reasons behind a life and death decision is a prerequisite to the ability to bear the responsibility for that decision."

I didn't intend to entertain the Bible's admonishment about blood, as to whether it prohibits consumption or both consumption and intravenous use.

From the most ancient renderings of the New Testament (the New World Translation is based on the Westcott and Hort text. Two manuscripts were favored by Westcott and Hort: Vaticanus and Sinaiticus), Acts 15:20 clearly states to abstain from blood. If you translate the Bible a hundred different ways, what is stated can mean whatever you darn well want it to. There's plenty of people that play games with the plain meaning of plain words.

Abstain for two reasons:

Health considerations. There were disease risks in eating blood. Blood transfusions weren't a common medical practice in the 1st century (the century the last book of the Bible was completed). The first historical attempt at a blood transfusion was described in the 17th century, although there was no way to safely store blood, screen blood for diseases or match blood types in the 17th century.

The sanctity of blood. Under the Mosaic Law there was only one use of blood that God ever approved, namely, for sacrifice. Animal sacrifices to make atonement for sin. (Le 17:10, 11) Under the Christian arrangement, the sanctity of blood was even more strongly emphasized.

While technology has removed some of the health risks, science hasn't resolved the modern flood of blood transfusions as a natural human function. Blood compatibility has many aspects, and is determined not only by the blood types (O, A, B, AB), but also by blood factors, (Rh, Kell, etc.). Much like fingerprints our blood is unique to ourselves; only identical twins have exactly the same antigens recognized by the immune system in their blood.

The sanctity of blood is of little importance to those completely disconnected from God or those that have an idealistic opinion of a supreme being that exists only in their mind. Transfusion medicine is still fraught with dangers, so it only has a future if alternatives aren't discovered for all medical circumstances. If alternatives aren't discovered, that should tell you something about medical science's inability to cure diseases.

22

Liberal or Conservative?

by alice.in.wonderland in

liberal or conservative?.

i see myself as a moderate, not just because of political neutrality but because the two ideologies have their strengths and inherit weaknesses.. http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/.

conservatives - believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional american values and a strong national defense.

alice.in.wonderland

Liberal or Conservative?

I'm neither. I see myself as a moderate, not just because of political neutrality but because the two ideologies have their strengths and inherit weaknesses.

http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

CONSERVATIVES - believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals.

Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems.

LIBERALS - believe in governmental action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all, and that it is the duty of the State to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Believe that people are basically good.

Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve people's problems.

The problem with many Democrats is their liberal attitude toward legalized marijuana,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMsWfR5atq8

...legalized prostitution, abortion, a culture of alternative lifestyles and transgendered sexes and other degrading behaviors. In a country full of hippies and misfits I guess you would need the government (someone else) to solve your problems.

The problem with conservatives is they can't seem to wrap their mind around the fact that greedy financial institutions still continue to prey on instant gratification (credit cards, abusive lending practices) and damage the economy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9mWAxHpeew

9

How WT Apologists at JWN inherently break forum rules. :)

by Essan in

i noticed the posting guidelines the other day as i was replying to djeggnog, one of our relentless wt apologists (although he's very unapologetic about it :) and i noticed one rule in particular that got me thinking.. seeing as such jw's are representatives of an organization that falsely claims to solely "represent" a pretty important person - god - and they frequently make the claim here that the org.

represents god on earth and that it's teachings are god's teachings - a claim they have been completely unable to substantiate - then i'm fairly sure they must be in breach of rule 7:.

"impersonating or falsely claiming to represent a person or organization".. so, if ever one was looking for a technicality on which to 'disfellowship' any particularly unpleasant and deceptive society worshipping spammers, then maybe posting guideline 7 might be the way to go.

alice.in.wonderland

I have nothing to apologize for. Are Jehovah's Witnesses defined by a publisher's record that states they're an active publisher? If that technically authenticates their position, so be it. You can't be disfellowshipped for anything internet related unless it's illegal. If you draw on the Bible principles you actively oppose to misrepresent a person, what's that make you?

58

Do You Still Believe the Bible is God's Word?

by cantleave in

if so why???.

btw - i just see it as collection of old books written by men who reflected the thinking and knowledge of their time?.

alice.in.wonderland

The point is you can blame the Bible, you can blame religion and the idea of a higher power that exacts punishment, but JWs are just a small fraction of that.

58

Do You Still Believe the Bible is God's Word?

by cantleave in

if so why???.

btw - i just see it as collection of old books written by men who reflected the thinking and knowledge of their time?.

alice.in.wonderland

If “No” how can Jehovah's Witnesses be blamed for:

The Blood Policy:

http://niv.scripturetext.com/acts/15.htm

It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Acts 15:28-29

Excommunication:

http://niv.scripturetext.com/1_corinthians/5.htm

Expel the Immoral Brother!

I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.”

http://niv.scripturetext.com/matthew/10.htm

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn

a man against his father,

a daughter against her mother,

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—

a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.

http://niv.scripturetext.com/exodus/22.htm

“Do not allow a sorceress to live. Exodus 22:18

From 1484 to 1782, the Christian church put to death about 300,000 women for witchcraft.

http://bible.cc/leviticus/20-13.htm

"'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Leviticus 20:13

In the year 390, the Christian emperors Valentinian II, Theodosius I and Arcadius denounced males "acting the part of a woman", condemning those who were guilty of such acts to be publicly burned.

98

Blood Fractions

by alice.in.wonderland in

someone is pressing me about blood fractions on an unrelated thread, so i just moved the topic to an appropriate location.. "the point for me in every thread you touch is your sickening dishonesty and nauseating apologies for the old men in brooklyn who tell you what to do.. they have told you that products made from blood don't use blood, and you are so corrupt and gullible you just accept it.".

i accept any bible-based religion that adheres to the bible as its authority.. the purpose of this magazine, the watchtower, is to honor jehovah god, the supreme ruler of the universe.

just as watchtowers in ancient times enabled a person to observe developments from afar, so this magazine shows us the significance of world events in the light of bible prophecies.

alice.in.wonderland

"The same passage says to abstain from "things strangled" and "things sacrified to idols".

If I take such meat and give it to a rendering plant that extracts byproducts like tallow and protein meal, and if I eat a great deal of this food extracted from
these forbidden meats, would I indeed be abstaining from them?"

"Things strangled" is referring to an unbled animal. If they sacrificed livestock to an idol before they did whatever with it I guess wouldn't know about it.

98

Blood Fractions

by alice.in.wonderland in

someone is pressing me about blood fractions on an unrelated thread, so i just moved the topic to an appropriate location.. "the point for me in every thread you touch is your sickening dishonesty and nauseating apologies for the old men in brooklyn who tell you what to do.. they have told you that products made from blood don't use blood, and you are so corrupt and gullible you just accept it.".

i accept any bible-based religion that adheres to the bible as its authority.. the purpose of this magazine, the watchtower, is to honor jehovah god, the supreme ruler of the universe.

just as watchtowers in ancient times enabled a person to observe developments from afar, so this magazine shows us the significance of world events in the light of bible prophecies.

alice.in.wonderland

"I have a strong feeling that you are counting time for service. When God finally confronts you, I wonder if he will bring up all the time you spent on this board trying to sway others away from him... I wonder if he will say, "Alice (or whatever your name is), why did you spend 2000+ hours trying to sway my servants away from me and fool them into thinking that the WT was my organization?" What will you say?"

You can ask the same questions of militant atheists.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/science-must-destroy-reli_b_13153.html

Sam Harris: Science Must Destroy Religion

The conflict between religion and science is inherent and (very nearly) zero-sum. The success of science often comes at the expense of religious dogma; the maintenance of religious dogma always comes at the expense of science. It is time we conceded a basic fact of human discourse: either a person has good reasons for what he believes, or he does not. When a person has good reasons, his beliefs contribute to our growing understanding of the world. We need not distinguish between "hard" and "soft" science here, or between science and other evidence-based disciplines like history. There happen to be very good reasons to believe that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941. Consequently, the idea that the Egyptians actually did it lacks credibility. Every sane human being recognizes that to rely merely upon "faith" to decide specific questions of historical fact would be both idiotic and grotesque — that is, until the conversation turns to the origin of books like the bible and the Koran, to the resurrection of Jesus, to Muhammad's conversation with the angel Gabriel, or to any of the other hallowed travesties that still crowd the altar of human ignorance.

According to what is stated above, religion is man-made. But even before this opinion grew in popularity, acceptance of what the Bible teaches and God playing an active role in a person's life still worked off a premise of interest. I remember going out in service before the internet and more times than not, I'd hear; "I'm not interested" and the door would shut. And even now, many people I've talked to informally don't know the basics of what Jehovah's Witnesses teach. The point is people don't reject the Bible's message for any other reason than they're not interested. And these individuals cannot be swayed or fooled into interest.

uw chap. 3 p. 21 par. 3 Keep a Firm Grip on the Word of God

Of course, many to whom we speak do not share our conviction that the Bible really is the Word of God. How can we help them? Often, the very best way is to open the Bible and show them what it contains. “The word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword . . . and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart.” (Heb. 4:12) “The word of God” is his word of promise, recorded in the Bible. It is not dead history but is alive and irresistibly moves toward fulfillment. As it does so, the true heart motivations of persons who are brought in touch with it become manifest as to meeting the conditions. Its influence is far more powerful than anything that we personally might say.