apologies if someone else has posted this before: .
http://vaticanenquirer.com/canadas-mormons-and-jehovahs-witnesses-brawl-trying-to-get-to-refugees-first/.
sorry, meant to say "fighting erupts" ... my bad.
This article was sourced from the " VaticanEnquier"
VaticanEnquier : - "The Obama administration is cracking down on the food industry forcing it to eliminate fat in foods over the next few months"
VaticanEnquier :- " Scientific study revels that homosexuality is Extremely Contagious"
So with respect to the O.P,s ".....WTF?" I say don't belief all the " WTF" you read.
The Rebel.
i have enjoyed some fascinating debates on the forum.
i have found it interesting when" facts" have been presented to support a viewpoint, yet the " facts" have then been rejected.. what does this mean?.
well the " truth" is as a dub, i was often presented with " facts" that the organisation was wrong, yet as this information challenged my belief system i convinced myself the " facts" were either completely wrong or misinterpreted, .
DJS Thanks for the post, which I look forward to reading tonight when I have more time.
Slimboyfat " There are no facts only interpretations. That's why I suggested to Paul Grundy years ago he should change his site from jwfacts to jwinterpretations."
The Rebel, Slim is it not a fact that Paul Grundy did not change his site from jwfacts to jwinterpretations?
Anyway according to the watchtower " The indisputable facts, show that the " time of the end" begang in 1799. ( W.T, March 1 1922) In fact the proof is quite clear and convincing that the second presence of our Lord dates from 1874" ( W.T Feb 15 1927)
Well in my opinion the " indisputable facts " are that the W.T doesnt know what a fact is. Does anybody here dispute the fact that the W.T society has a history of failed date setting and discarded doctrine?
If you don't agree that's a " fact" please clarify why?
The Rebel.
i have enjoyed some fascinating debates on the forum.
i have found it interesting when" facts" have been presented to support a viewpoint, yet the " facts" have then been rejected.. what does this mean?.
well the " truth" is as a dub, i was often presented with " facts" that the organisation was wrong, yet as this information challenged my belief system i convinced myself the " facts" were either completely wrong or misinterpreted, .
I have enjoyed some fascinating debates on the forum. I have found it interesting when" FACTS" have been presented to support a viewpoint, yet the " FACTS" have then been rejected.
What does this mean?
Well the " TRUTH" is as a dub, I was often presented with " FACTS" that the organisation was wrong, yet as this information challenged my belief system I convinced myself the " FACTS" were either completely wrong or misinterpreted,
This is why I remained in " The Truth" :-Despite facts that my viewpoint was completely wrong?
So because I felt threatened of the consequences to my belief system being wrong,regardless of how wrong I was I was never going to readjust my thinking and accept this new information despite it being true and the evidence presented with facts.
This is :-
A) Why I realise rather than facts driving my beliefs it has often been my belief system which has dictated the facts I choose to accept.
B) And why I have tried when presented with contrary information to my be belief system, to accept my current thinking may be uninformed and that it is ok to change my mind.
So in conclusion :
a) Facts can be misinterpreted or take information out of context to support an argument.
b) When facts are presented in an honest and irrefutable way, my dub past allows me to empathise with the resistance some on this board have in accepting those facts.
Anyway any suggestions on how best to avoid unhealthy debates when people don't believe the facts.
The Rebel.
what were some of the derogatory things you heard or said about house holders?
.
i was taught that if they didn't answer the door & you knew they were in it was always that they had a guilty conscience..
I always found that householders in the more affluent areas received a lot of deogatory comments for their materalistic success. I put this down to jealously. The irony was that these were the very houses we would have liked to live in after armageddon :-)
The Rebel.
having recently read orwells 1984, i was impressed with how he understood that both politicians and people abuse language.
this further confirmed to me how the w.t had deceived me by using words to distort reality.
the book 1984, also contains many other great thoughts of george orwell.. of course there have been many other great thinkers, buddah, darwin, freud, einstein and marx come to mind.
Muddy Walters " apologies if some of these people may not be considerd " great thinkers" On the contrary i think Bill Waterson and Charles Schultz are excellent suggestions. If you must apologise I would suggest it's not for including " Muddy Walters" on your list.
So yes I think my heroes and artists like Picasso and entertainers like Buster Keaton can deservedly belong on the list of great thinkers.
The Rebel.
having recently read orwells 1984, i was impressed with how he understood that both politicians and people abuse language.
this further confirmed to me how the w.t had deceived me by using words to distort reality.
the book 1984, also contains many other great thoughts of george orwell.. of course there have been many other great thinkers, buddah, darwin, freud, einstein and marx come to mind.
Interesting thoughts and suggestions. I guess in conclusion great origional thinkers are few and far between, but each individual can strive to become a better critical thinker.
" Of one thing we can be sure: The quality of our life will be determined by the quality of our thinking" Edward De Bono.
The Rebel.
the three hebrew boys chose death over bowing down to lifeless idols.
early christians refused to sacrifice to the emperor's genious.
jws in nazi germany refused to sign a document that will result in their release or spare them from execution.
With respect to the Jehovers Witness " Martyrs" this is the true History of the society and National socialism.
"Be it known once and for all that those profiteering. conscienless, selfish men who call themselfs Jews, and who control the greatest portion of the finance of the world and the business world, ......Golden Age 1927 Feb 23 p 343.
" In the 1934 year book the society wrote " that it supports the principals of the German government straightforwdly (p 136) and that the defended very high ideas proclaimed by the national government are stated and endorsed and strongly underlined in its publicaions ( p 137) it also states that it's literature, it's work instead of being a threat with the government principals is the firmest defender of such high ideas (p138)
Of course most Jehovers Witnesses are not aware of how the organisation fully supported Hitler, ( Which is why I have highlighted sources and pages). However when the German government wanted to take control of the organisations property, Rutherford with total disregard for the well being of the German witness started :-
A) Baiting Hitler, which is the consequence that they ended up in concentration camps.
B) Rewritting it's support for Hitler, and condemning him. (The writings most are familiar with)
So " The revolting morality underpinning martyrdom" for a witness in a concentration camp was in the mistaken belief it was for Jehover. But the reality was they were worshipping an organisation whose leader Rutherford was responsible because he was more concerned about the societies property in Germany than the welfare of his German followers.
Sad but true the Witnesses fully supported Hitler ,National Socialisam and the persecution of the Jews. So much for neutrality.
The Rebel.
having recently read orwells 1984, i was impressed with how he understood that both politicians and people abuse language.
this further confirmed to me how the w.t had deceived me by using words to distort reality.
the book 1984, also contains many other great thoughts of george orwell.. of course there have been many other great thinkers, buddah, darwin, freud, einstein and marx come to mind.
As I suspected a long list of great thinkers .
Now my observation is that most of the great thinkers mentiond are considerd correct in their thinking. So my question is do you think to be a great thnker it is necessary to be correct in ones thinking?
The Rebel.
having recently read orwells 1984, i was impressed with how he understood that both politicians and people abuse language.
this further confirmed to me how the w.t had deceived me by using words to distort reality.
the book 1984, also contains many other great thoughts of george orwell.. of course there have been many other great thinkers, buddah, darwin, freud, einstein and marx come to mind.
You post made a great observation Phizzy.
Great thinkers are influenced by great thinkers. This is true be they writers, artists, polititians, Scientists or philosophers, ect. Which makes" The reading of all good books like a conversation with the finest men of past centuries" - Rene Descartes.
And that being so I have enjoyed my recent conversations with Orwell, Shakespeare and Conan Doyles, " Sherlock Holmes":-
" There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact" The Boscombe Valley mystery.
" To a great mind, nothing is little" A Study in Scarlet.
The Rebel.
having recently read orwells 1984, i was impressed with how he understood that both politicians and people abuse language.
this further confirmed to me how the w.t had deceived me by using words to distort reality.
the book 1984, also contains many other great thoughts of george orwell.. of course there have been many other great thinkers, buddah, darwin, freud, einstein and marx come to mind.
Having recently read Orwells 1984, I was impressed with how he understood that both politicians and people abuse language. This further confirmed to me how the W.T had deceived me by using words to distort reality. The book 1984, also contains many other great thoughts of George Orwell.
Of course there have been many other great thinkers, Buddah, Darwin, Freud, Einstein and Marx come to mind. So:-
A) Who do you consider the great thinkers are who have influenced the way you think today and why?
B) Do you think great thinking often comes about by average thinkers debating together?
The Rebel.
