Posts by Half banana

17

Wedding Rings.

by Lost in the fog in

we have long queried why so-called things of pagan or religious origin like christmas or easter are banned by the wts but the use of wedding rings were not.. i was talking about this with a friend who follows a wiccan path of belief and he has sent me the following information from one of his magic magazines.. quote: .

" why do we wear our wedding ring on our ‘ring finger’ ?

thus, to properly activate the ring finger we need to wear a golden ring on it.

Half banana

I agree with what you say about wedding rings, most rituals are bound up with ancient superstitions.

You also mention Easter is not celebrated but in reality the essentials which the pagan Easter festival which was fed into the Christian Church is also incorporated into WT doctrine. It is so central to the ransom belief that all the things to do with the death of Jesus are found in paganism. The last supper was cribbed from Mithraism including the symbolic wine and biscuits. Even the fundamental pagan symbol of cleansing by human sacrifice is present. The timing of Easter at the first full moon after the spring equinox is perpetuated by JW doctrine. The death and resurrection of Jesus had counterparts in pagan worship as the son of the Sun God going to his heavenly father hence the brightness of the two of them ruling together in the heavens.

There are a lot more fascinating parallels which can be related directly to older folk tradition but the main point is that the Roman Church especially under Theodosius in the late fourth century banned all references to the pagan texts under harsh penalty and so began the illusion that the church and Bible had come by divine decree. The beliefs and rituals had in reality all come from paganism. Virtually all of Jesus' life, works and biography had been borrowed from pagan predecessors.

13

irrefutable proof of the great apostasy that corrupted the catholic church

by TTWSYF in

when the emperor constantine legalized christianity in the roman empire around 311ad he allowed or introduced a flood of half converted pagans and allowed the corruption that sullied the true faith and ruined christianity until a time when it could be restored to the true and pure faith that it was intended to become.

many people here know that to be a fact.

it's a common sense theory, right?.

Half banana

Agreed there does not have to be a "true religion" from which an apostacy could occur. There is no such thing as a true religion in the first place, such an impression is surely a subjective one by those brought together under the spell of their own particular group's tradition and being emotionally bonded to it.

Neither is there evidence for a "great apostacy" with the Roman Church corrupting Christianity. The Romans were polytheist and had a tolerant attitude, they promoted piety, an outward, visible fidelity to the gods which they held was more important than to which one you venerated.

To the Romans, the various sects making up Christianity were a political annoyance because they were intolerant of others beliefs, they were monotheist, pacifist and had an interior belief system based on faith and obedience to God even when it was at odds with the state. Early Christians even relished persecution and martyrdom which in turn attracted other religious idealists to bolster the movement. It is therefore more of a surprise that the Christian Church, which was drawn from all the older religions especially Mithraism should become the dominant one by the end of the fourth century. The last Mithraic Pope Praetextatus, was offered the position of first Roman Pope in the state role of Ponifex maximus (great bridgemaker) but he declined. Of course the RC church later fabricated their links back to Peter to establish a spiritual pedigree springing from him.

Christianity was cultic from the start and Constantine for a number of reasons, not the least of which was because his beloved mother Helen was a believer, pressed for a unification of all religious belief under the one Imperial umbrella. He succeeded in creating legal toleration of Christianity in 313, (under Diocletion it had been banned), the Bishops had their heads banged together in 325CE at Council of Nicene (at what is today Isnik Turkey) and unified a universal (catholic) doctrine which was implemented only as late as 380 CE.

This is a big subject but necessary to study if we are to understand early Christianity. In this regard, the Bible does not help us! Like all cult outpourings it is entirely one sided. We need the voice of the historian archaeologist and sociologist to disentangle myth from the facts.

Rome declined and fell, but Roman Christianity took on the mantle of secular power and took Europe and Western Asia into centuries of the Dark Ages.

Yale does a lot of good You tube lectures on this period.

33

Pale.Emperor Summons Some Demons

by pale.emperor in

remember when we were jws and all loved to hear demon stories?

and then there was always that paranoid person that would shut us up "in case they're listening"?

and the resident crazy every congregation seems to have that claims to have been possessed at some point?.

Half banana

What you did Pale is not unreasonable. When I was about eleven I tried all sorts of methods divination with the same success as you had, there was no response-- nuffink!

What exercises my mind is the infantile respect people have for unseen, unknowable and un-provable spirits. In five thousand years of literature promoting the worship and fear of gods and demons, there has never been a single concrete proof of the the existence of even one spirit being let alone a god.

But I protest! most people believe in gods and demons, how can most of the world be wrong?

OK they do exist!......but only in people's minds.

22

Shift in beliefs?

by blankspace in

i was wondering whether anyone observed this point in the previous week's wt study, in paragraph 17: "jehovah’s spirit moves “the faithful steward” to keep giving his servants their food supply.".

i see this as a subtle move away from earlier claims to be channel for spiritual food.

the gb earlier said that they weren't inspired or infallible.

Half banana

Blankspace, you ask where this shift of role is leading. Formerly the GB claimed to be The One and Only Channel.

No doubt it was pointed out that if they were God's private communication channel to mankind they would always get things right--and they never did--so they have to adjust the wording.

The essence of this shift is to create wriggle room and attempt to have it both ways. They can't be god's chosen and get their predictions wrong but by the disclaimer that they are not infallible (which it laughably true) they hope to continue their role as god's fallible spokesmen.

To outsiders the JW leadership are irrelevant cranks and religious businessmen but in the minds of the flock whatever wording they use to describe themselves and their perceived function, they make out that they are up there with the angels.

It has only become apparent to me since leaving how they maintain an ethos of what a JW is expected to believe as distinct from what they officially lay down as statements in the Watchtower.

Where is it leading? More of the same pulling of the wool over the eyes of the gullible.

22

Shift in beliefs?

by blankspace in

i was wondering whether anyone observed this point in the previous week's wt study, in paragraph 17: "jehovah’s spirit moves “the faithful steward” to keep giving his servants their food supply.".

i see this as a subtle move away from earlier claims to be channel for spiritual food.

the gb earlier said that they weren't inspired or infallible.

Half banana

I strongly agree with you Tenacious, the org leaders deliberately associate all their activities with the work of God to the extent that in the mind of the gullible flock, these eight men are made to fuse an identify with their tribal God Jehovah. This is perhaps their most all embracing and powerful propaganda tool; to identify the GB with the Almighty. What the GB says is what Big J says and what they do is what Big J wants to be done.

The reality is far removed from this scenario, throughout their whole history they have never got anything right and they only do things which reflect the opportunities of the moment such as now pointing to post-communist Russia and declare, "It must be the end, look how we are being persecuted."

However this lifelong conditioning of JWs never leads to even one individual receiving any benefits except imaginary ones such as a promise of paradise. Promises, promises! It is a fantasy to give fools some hope in life . . . and I know 'cos once I was there.

In the mean time the shepherds at the top just keep on getting fatter whilst the sheep are fleeced.

22

Matthew 24:37-39 Proves That Jesus is Fictional

by APieceOfShitNamedTate in

i was doing some browsing today on http://watchtowerletters.com and discovered a very thought provoking point.

the fact is that the flood of noah's day does not stand up to scientific scrutiny or common sense.

this becomes all the more apparent when considering an ancient story like the epic of gilgamesh.

Half banana

IBIOverlapping, for an early sociologist and journalist's view of the evidence of the early centuries of the calendar, try JM Robertson, A brief history of Christianity.

22

Matthew 24:37-39 Proves That Jesus is Fictional

by APieceOfShitNamedTate in

i was doing some browsing today on http://watchtowerletters.com and discovered a very thought provoking point.

the fact is that the flood of noah's day does not stand up to scientific scrutiny or common sense.

this becomes all the more apparent when considering an ancient story like the epic of gilgamesh.

Half banana

OP there is only Watchtower logic about your premise that if the flood did not exist then Jesus' words are false.

It is a scientific given that the Biblical flood could not have happened but quoting myths as if they are realities is the religious norm.

What we are dealing with here are words attributed to Jesus written way after he was supposed to have lived.

In the first and second centuries there were lots of christ cults, god-men and saviours. It was in the interest of the leaders of a christ cult to include in their text, the endorsement of Noah's flood by its particular god-man hero.

Bear in mind that the earliest non-canonical christian writings do not give the name Jesus but call him Lord. The name "Jesus" certainly appears by the third quarter of the second century according to Melito of Sardis however his works like all manuscripts and especially "christian" ones, were subject to being edited by later tamperers and zealots such as Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea. Manuscripts can be altered at each re-writing, to add a name or attribute a belief to a character was easy peasy--just make sure you destroy the earlier copies.

We have the Roman Catholic church at Emperor Constantine's urging to thank for the unification of all Christian (and pagan) cults under the name of Jesus in the fourth century. By then the idea that Jesus existed was not in doubt in the minds of the faithful. The poor people had no choice but to believe in authority.

60

Fifty years ago today: One quote to demolish the Watchtower

by JeffT in

jw
friends

i did not have any connection to jw's when they published this, about two weeks before i graduated from high school.

i'm now on medicare and collecting social security.

so much for their ability to see into the future.

Half banana

This was Pollyanna propaganda from the 1969 JW leadership showing how truly stupid, ignorant, false, misleading and life-stealing they were and still are . . .

13

The "New Light" alibi author -- man of 1,000 wives and concubines

by FatFreek 2005 in

but, god would never allow that today.

he's gone through a learning curve.

does god even learn?.

Half banana

13

The "New Light" alibi author -- man of 1,000 wives and concubines

by FatFreek 2005 in

but, god would never allow that today.

he's gone through a learning curve.

does god even learn?.

Half banana

You make a couple of good points FF, God does not learn or by the attribution given to him as being perfect, he cannot learn.

Secondly how could you grant "godly wisdom" to a man who has many hundreds of concubines?

As a fifteen year long archaeological study of Palestine ending in 1993 found, there was no evidence for most of the events and people of the Bible. At the time of Solomon and David there were so few inhabitants in the Judean highlands that it would have been materially impossible to even make a city and temple, far less a monarchy to be reckoned with internationally. Thomas L Thomson, a leading expert in the textual and archaeological evidence for early Israelite history concludes that the first ten books of the Bible are fiction.

There is of course nothing wrong with reading fiction--- a problem arises only if you believe it to be true.

Solomon, whose description is a burlesque of a middle Eastern potentate, was -- like most Biblical figures -- a fictional character.