Retrovirus

Joined

• started 11 topics
• posted 713 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Retrovirus

• 
  398

  Jwfacts, Why Do You Equate Miracles With Magic?

  by Recovery in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have a question for the author of the website jwfacts.

  as i was reading the sparlock article, i couldn't help but notice something seriously wrong:.

  "the bible abounds in vivid fantasy, such as its many celestial descriptions, or the portrayal of warring kingdoms with imaginary beasts.. the sparlock message is confusing, as much for an adult as for a child, as the bible shows that god's followers practice magic, even if they are usually referred to as miracles.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  I was thinking about responding to certain points but then I again I doubt anyone is still paying attention 8 days later

  Is that the theocratic way of saying "you win?"
• 
  11

  Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 09-23-2012 WT Study (FAMILY)

  by blondie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the oneness of.

  what is the purpose of gods.

  how do we observe the oneness.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  As JWGoneBad says. . .

  From para 9:

  Do I avoid others so as not to remind

  them of whatever it is they have against

  me, perhaps making sure there is sufficient

  distance between us?

  But wait. . .isn't this the religion where everyone has "True Love" for one another? Now they need distance?
• 
  114

  The Bible-- Full of Errors And Inconsistencies?

  by Recovery in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i noticed in the "magic" thread many former jw's no longer adhere to the bible as the unerring and accurate word of god.

  if you feel this way, can you please list any specific reasons/arguments as to why not.

  this thread isn't for debating purposes, but simply for listing.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Genesis 1 vs Genesis 2

  God needs a proof reader.
• 
  31

  Is There a Such Thing as Progressive Understanding?

  by Recovery in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  is there such a thing as progressive understanding of god's will?

  a simple yes or no will suffice, but if you'd like to state why, please by all means do so..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Is there such a thing as progressive understanding of God's will?

  For any individual, yes, of course.

  For anyone or group claiming to speak under the direction of the Holy Spirit or any other form of "infallibility", no, it doesn't apply. Either they were not speaking as directed, or they were not directed at all.
• 
  51

  Jesus was an Angel and used God's name

  by Christ Alone in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  interesting stuff in the november wt.

  note this dishonest quote:.

  during his ministry, jesus.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Elephant writes:

  ...i'm interested in seeing you understanding now...would you mind providing your interpretation of wether Jesus is or not an angel?

  thanks!

  If you want to know something about a poster and her/his beliefs, Elephant, click on their name and look at some of the earliest topics they posted on. This will help you know where I'm coming from. It's also the reason Besty suggested you tell us a bit about yourself.

  Any more info that you have a good reason to ask, pls PM me.

  Retro
• 
  51

  Jesus was an Angel and used God's name

  by Christ Alone in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  interesting stuff in the november wt.

  note this dishonest quote:.

  during his ministry, jesus.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Hi Elephant,

  i appreciate that you continue to interact with me...

  You're welcome.

  ...your question as to why i'm here if i'm not an apostate is only logical if you concede that you are one...but i dont think you or anyone here would do that...

  Don't be too sure. apostacy can reasonably be regarded as a badge of honour. was Martin Luther an apostate? Anyway I could be seen as an apostate, in the sense that my spiritual beliefs changed over time and don't exactly conform to those of the church I was raised in.

  So, please seiously consider Besty's advice and tell us a bit about yourself and why you are here.

  ...and it was christ alone that introduced this topic...he argues that it is I that holds the burden of proof, even though HE introduced the topic...i have simply asked him to prove OTHERWISE (that Jesus is NOT an angel)...and he has not been able to do this yet... (see my counterpoints.)

  Sure, I've read your posts. With respect, you need to read up about logical fallacies. The OP didn't argue that Jesus was or wasn't an angel, but that the Bible does not say that Jesus was an angel. See, that is defensible because we can agree on the content of the Bible. Now it's not enough to select a few verses and indicate that they may suggest something; for this article to be an honest belief statement of a Bible-based religion, it must show where the Bible supports what is in the article.

  hope this helps. Retro
• 
  51

  Jesus was an Angel and used God's name

  by Christ Alone in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  interesting stuff in the november wt.

  note this dishonest quote:.

  during his ministry, jesus.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Hi Elephant

  ...again...i won't call myself an apostate..hence the second choice...

  Ok, fine, you don't call yourself an apostate. But if you are a jw what are you doing here?

  as for the second point...well...as you can see, i too used the same "evidence" and "reason" that christ alone presented forth...

  Now that's not correct. Christ Alone said that nowhere in the Bible is Jesus presented as an angel, and nowhere in the Bible does Jesus call God Jehovah. These are facts. You have been unable to refute them. And yet you claim to base your faith on evidence and reason.
• 
  51

  Jesus was an Angel and used God's name

  by Christ Alone in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  interesting stuff in the november wt.

  note this dishonest quote:.

  during his ministry, jesus.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  So, Elephant:

  In post 20 you say

  …except religion is not factual based is it?

  But now it's

  rather i base my faith on evidence and reason...in regards to this particular subject (is Jesus an angel?) u can clearly see my evidence and reason is not compatible with yours or christ alone's...

  As well as being unable to maintain your line of argument it seems you misuse the words "evidence" and "reason". All your point comes down to "you are wrong, Christ Alone is wrong, I'm right whatever faith is based on" without a shred of support let alone evidence.

  Not much point in continuing, then.
• 
  72

  There's gotta be another faction in the Writing Department, either that or they can't see the irony.

  by Theocratic Sedition in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the past two week's worth of wt studies have made a couple points that appear contradictory in nature.

  yesterday was too much, i felt at least.

  either there's another faction within the writing department fighting for the equivalent of airtime in the literature, or they're all so indoctrinated that they fail to see the irony in what they publish.. for instance, take paragraph 5 from last week's lesson.. 5. unlike the law codes of many countries, "the perfect law" is neither complex nor burdensome but consists of simple commandements and principles.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Hi Elephant,

  Just replying to your post 21 on the right thread; you wrote

  Again, the word substantial does not denote absolute…but to follow your line of thinking, the effects of environments are in fact ill when they are abusive…say for example, a jail or a an underground bunker for imprisonment purposes…I wouldn’t rule out that there are extremist religions comparable to providing such environments…but its silly to compare the JWs to one of these…as far as I know, anyone can leave the religion without having to worry of being thrown in jail…

  No, we won't compare any religions to being thrown in jail. We won't even compare JCs with propoerly conducted trials. So you are arguing that "substantial" risk is not a problem because it is not absolute. I'm so glad my employing company doesn't base the Health and Safety policy on that "reasonong"!

  It's not that simple; there are many stages a person goes through when changing a fundamental belief. Also if the person has been isolated from that world. . .yes, it can be a big problem.

  Well here is an idea I’m finding to be very predominant in these posts…that ‘freedom’ is a long and arduous task without any assurances that it can be attained…one that’s unconvincing…if ‘freedom’ is being dangled just outside of the religion, why is it so hard to attain, yet JW’s will convincingly (and happily) repeat to you that they are in fact free…

  It would be polite if you allowed me to decide what I do and don't find convincing. You notice that I didn't even mention "freedom", which is not a task, BTW. Certainly if a person has only socialised in a restricted group it's difficult to expand their circle of friends outside it; if a person has from early childhood learned to look down on "worldlies", it's hard to associate with them and if such a person is outcast by former friends and family it's not easy to get by at all.

  yet JW’s will convincingly (and happily) repeat to you that they are in fact free…

  Yet the whole point of this thread (and many others) is that what jws say isn't always easy to reconcile with what is.

  Retro

  I'm puzzled! Where have I argued in favour of mind control? Choice or not is addressed above.

  Sorry, others’ argument for mind control…

  ...or ...your eye has become simple after all...

  Now if I were a JW that would be a compliment, I think. As it is I'll just say that argument by . . . is pretty simple too, and I've seen it before here.

  …a simple eye denotes a simple mind, no? are you not looking for a simple resolution to this conundrum of elusive freedom?

  qrrt

  I'm puzzled! Where have I argued in favour of mind control? Choice or not is addressed above.

  Sorry, others’ argument for mind control…

  ...or ...your eye has become simple after all...

  Now if I were a JW that would be a compliment, I think. As it is I'll just say that argument by . . . is pretty simple too, and I've seen it before here.

  …a simple eye denotes a simple mind, no? are you not looking for a simple resolution to this conundrum of elusive freedom?
• 
  51

  Jesus was an Angel and used God's name

  by Christ Alone in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  interesting stuff in the november wt.

  note this dishonest quote:.

  during his ministry, jesus.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Hi Elephant!

  I'm replying to your post 20, where you say:

  …except religion is not factual based is it?otherwise we would not be having this discussion, right? Christ alone’s point is based on his own parameters he’s set for his mind and comprehension…and he assumes any other interpretation is false… that sounds a little like any person whose confident in his own beliefs…

  So religion isn't fact based? Actually I'd largely agree, but I'm afraid you are not very well versed in what your religion teaches.

  Have a look at the quotes in the first article here.

  An example:

  The Bible describes true faith as “the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld.” (Hebrews 11:1) Clearly, far from being naive, a person with real faith has based his beliefs on a careful scrutiny of all available data. Reasoning on such information produces the conviction that even things that cannot be seen with the literal eye are, nonetheless, realities.

  So please tell, are you an apostate, or do you base your faith on evidence and reason? And if the evidence shows that the Bible does not call Jesus an angel, why would the jws do so?

  I'll respond to the other reply on the correct thread; not a good idea to mix them up.

  Retro