from the various readings about the subject, it occured to me that pedophilia could very well be hardwired, as are homosexuality and heterosexuality.
that's not to say that it can be legitimized, like the other 2 sexualities.
it does mean though, that a different approach needs to be taken as soon as pedo proclivity shows itself.
Nah it's a choice.
Who wouldn't want to be shunned by society, sent to prison for years, threatened with castration or murder by every random yokel that finds out and then labeled as a sex offender for the rest of their lives?
They choose to be attracted to children just the same as men choose to be attracted to women.
nobody in my immediate family has, as far as i know.
there seems to be an unwritten rule against them among the witnesses.
(or maybe a written rule i'm not aware of).
Yes I am much better,
Glad to hear it.
I always thought therapists were like mechanics; You just keep going back for the rest of your life so you don't fall apart.
nobody in my immediate family has, as far as i know.
there seems to be an unwritten rule against them among the witnesses.
(or maybe a written rule i'm not aware of).
One would have to be nuts to talk with a psychotherapist.
Everybody is nuts.
Did you ever (or do you think you will) reach a point where you are 'all better now' and don't need to see the therapist anymore?
nobody in my immediate family has, as far as i know.
there seems to be an unwritten rule against them among the witnesses.
(or maybe a written rule i'm not aware of).
Hah, wow.
I didn't think they'd even LET your mother sit in. That's pretty much guaranteeing you can't speak freely.
I don't think I'd trust the guy to be legit and confidential unless I had chosen and paid the man myself.
nobody in my immediate family has, as far as i know.
there seems to be an unwritten rule against them among the witnesses.
(or maybe a written rule i'm not aware of).
Nobody in my immediate family has, as far as I know. There seems to be an unwritten rule against them among the witnesses. (Or maybe a written rule I'm not aware of)
Have you hired one? Why did you? And was it worthwhile?
Do you think they'd be useful to everybody, or only people with specific problems.
http://blog.friendseat.com/companies-using-wood-pulp-powdered-cellulose/.
weird, huh?.
metatron.
That's weird.
But then again sugarcane in it's raw form is barely more edible than a chunk of wood.
And if you simply change the name from 'Wood' to to 'Minotoxinic Fiberacid Leadium Chips'
Then the reaction changes from: "Well that's interesting" to "Holy crap they are poisoning our food!"
i have put together a new article regarding whether the global flood of noah is possible.
it utilises a lot of information from threads on jwn, and some of you may recognise your own comments.
please feel free to proof read, make suggestions, provide further references, etc.. http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/flood-noah-global.php.
The article is great.
A few thoughts:
In the opening paragraph it says:
"This article addresses an array of evidence regarding whether it is possible a global flood occurred 4,400 years ago."
I belive that should be changed too: "whether it is possible that a global flood occurred. . . ."
I'd add some more information to the Egypt section. It wasn't just their structures that survived, it was their entire culture. If we can imagine that the pyramids were built before the flood and somehow survived, it doesn't explain how their ability to read hyroglyphics, language and culture somehow survived the flood as well.
The Sumarians history begins in 5300 BC (roughly 1,300 years before god created humans) and continues uninterupted until 200 years after the flood when they were defeated by the Gutians. They were then defeated by Uruk, who were then defeated by Babylon.
if jehovah can read hearts then why did he test abraham by ordering him to kill his son ?.
It's also intersting that 'god's friend' totally didn't think that request was out of character at all.
why don't established religions care about ron wyatt's archaelogical findings confirming the bible?
what does that reveal about them?
have you any idea?.
His videos are available here for like $20 a copy: http://arkdiscovery.com/DVD-RGT.htm
But of course it's also available on Youtube. They seem to be of the same quality as your standard youtube/powerpoint slideshow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-eSRcr9CWw
It provides no evidence, just makes claims.
For Elijahs cave, I would expect something like:
"We can tell this is Elijah's cave because it contains traces of magic mushroom paste dating back to the time of Elijah and drawings of Elijah's visions blah blah blah."
Instead it's just: "And here's Elijah's cave because we said so! Look at it, it's a cave in a desert, what else could it have possibly been?"
why don't established religions care about ron wyatt's archaelogical findings confirming the bible?
what does that reveal about them?
have you any idea?.
But on other things he has proofs, I have seen videos confirming the other findings, like the true crossing point of the Read Sea.
He claims to have fournd a wheel off a beach in Nuweiba. He also claims that wheel was from an egyptian chariot.
He then leaves it up to fundamentalists to assume that this is just one of thousands of chariot wheels from Pharoahs army who all died in a miraculous crossing of the Red Sea Gulf of Aqaba while chasing Moses and the Israelites.
Assuming this wasn't impossible to be true it would of course mean that there are millions of historical artifacts down there just waiting to be recovered. It's a shame nobody with so much as a little initiative believed him in the past 2 decades or they could be rich by now.
Actually it doesn't add up at all. First of all I know it's impossible for the biblical account to be true as written.
If the plagues happened that would mean that in the span of a few short years or less. Egypt lost:
It's entire fishing industry due to the whole nile turning into blood killing any fish.
All of it's livestock (save for the horses that later pulled the chariots I assume)
It's entire labor force, being set free to wander around for 40 years.
All of their crops from hail.
All of their crops from Locusts.
All of their firstborn children.
Tons of other people died from disease and hail.
It's ruler and his heir both died.
The entire army including all their weapons, chariots and armor sunk to the bottom of some body of water.
All or most of their gold and wealth was given to the Hebrews
Leaving the Egyptians with no food of any kind, no leadership, no morale, no way to defend themselves and nothing to trade for supplies.
And yet historically it looks like they were in one of their most prosperous dynasties rather than being completely dissolved into the neighboring nations.
A single uneducated dude, who I know to have been a fraud about other things, claiming that he found a single wheel (where there should be tens of thousands along with weapons and armor) is just not enough to change all that.
Even if I had some reason to believe his claims, I'd figure the wheel was from a merchant ship or something more reasonable.
Ignoring ALL of that. The wheel he claims to have found isn't even in the right spot. Here's where Ron thinks the Israelites crossed: Linky
That's the Gulf of Aqaba. To even get there they would have had to already crossed or gone around the Red Sea to the West and ran right PAST Mount Sinai located here
So they would have had to go BACK across the Gulf of Aqaba that they just got done crossing, or gone up around it again just to get to Mount Sinai.
Unless Mount Sinai is in a completely different spot than everyone else thinks. Which Ron claims. His reason for thinking that? Because he wants it to be true so that his other theory about the gulf crossing can also be true. So he chose some random hill in the middle of nowhere that he claims looks like god set the top on fire.
Ultimately, why don't mainstream relgions embrace his wacky ideas? Because their own wacky ideas don't need proof, even fake proof. They can just claim stuff and their people believe it.
They've gotten away with being super-vague so far, why take the risk of being specific and allowing yourself to be proven wrong?
