Terra Incognita

Joined

• started 6 topics
• posted 557 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Terra Incognita

• 
  205

  The Christian Onslaught

  by satinka in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  *sigh* i have been noticing lately there are a number of groups of "christians" signing up as members of this forum, with the obvious agenda of gaining converts for their own cult-like religions.

  i have been wondering things like:.

  hmmm...maybe i'll try ignoring them.. thank you simon for the space to vent.. satinka.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Godrulz:

  Some of you throw the baby out with the bathwater and swing the pendulum too far the other way. This is a reflection of where you are at, a need for healing/wholeness, a need for maturity and obedience, etc.

  Thus saith Godrulz:
• 
  91

  A polite way to ask someone to keep their hands to themselves...

  by White Dove in

  1. social
  2. relationships

  what's a polite way to ask a man to keep his hands to himself while conversing in a group with you?.

  this neighbor of mine and i were sitting in chairs on the deck with other people.. he always touched me whenever he said anything to me or i said anything to him.. it was as if he was using touch like an antenna to send and receive signals.. i didn't know what to do, so instead of risking embarrassment for us both, i did nothing but stand up and step away.. i stepped away after he attempted to caress my hamstrings on one leg.. *shudder*.

  wonder why 60+ year old men think that a woman being nice to him means she's hot for him.. also wonders why it's only the smoking, beer guzzling, scrawny, bony, and smelly old men who do that.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Carry this picture in your purse at all times. Then when he touches you show it to him.

  
• 
  277

  What say you Christians ???

  by wobble in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it seems to me that most, if not all christians are really hung up on sin and redemption from sin and how naturally evil we all are.. my question, and observation is this : i had nothing to do with whatever you say adam and eve did wrong, i have always, throughout my life, treated whoever i came into contact with compassion, respect and love.. i have lived by the golden rule.. not many people, hand on heart, can say that, i can.. so, is your god going to judge me for the "sin" of some mythical forebears of mine ?

  is he going to say that , because i did not believe in him, i willl be judged adversely, even though i lived by the precepts he is supposed to support ?.

  all i can say is, if your god is like that, i refuse to worship or acknowledge him.. and i certainly do not want to get to know him.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Bohm, Post #2213:

  "ah, godrulz, so the baby does not deserve to die, but the mom and slightly older siblings does?"

  Godrulz, Post 438:

  God is holy and man is sinful. You wrongly assume that God is not holy and that man is good (read the paper and Bible, dude). Rom. 1-5 is God's view of things. When you stand before Him, you will be without excuse under His blazing eye. Unless you think Hitler was a good man and defend his right to kill your relatives, you should have some concept of love, mercy, justice, grace, etc. Apparently, you have a seared conscience and are smarter than an omniscient God, the responsible Moral Governor of the universe vs foolish men.

  Godrulz; since you seem to know the fate of fetuses and infants, could you please tell me at what age the dividing line is? Approximately, no need for exactitude. For example; 7 years old, give or take a year?
• 
  10

  Political Preferences

  by Band on the Run in

  1. social
  2. current

  i've noted extreme left-wingers and extreme right-wingers here and, of course, everyone in between.

  the right wing seems louder but that could be just my own bias.

  some active witness in a republican club was trying to do research a couple of months ago about witnesses and party affiliatoin or ideology.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Band on the Run:

  I've noted extreme left-wingers and extreme right-wingers here and, of course, everyone in between. The right wing seems louder but that could be just my own bias.

  No Band; it's not your bias. Based on what I've witnessed:

  • Conservatives are rude right away.
  • Tend to engage in name calling immediately after a person, with a different view, makes a remark.
  • Automatically assume that the person making the remark that they don't agree with is a "Liberal".
  • Do not even have the mental capacity to distinguish between different ideologies in the political spectrum. As a result of this they split the world into themselves ("real" Americans) and Socialists; a bugaboo word that they think describes every political philosophy but theirs. Their world is either black, white or, if they have the pretense of sophistication, they acknowledge two shades of gray.

  I would think that Witnesses would embrace a conservative, authoritarian ideology that is strong on moral/social values.

  The Jehovah's Witnesses, being apolitical and, more importantly, monomaniacal like all authoritarian cultures, force their members into one "ideological" mold regardless of what their natural inclinations would be. Once they are free of the oppressive hold of the Watchtower, the former Witnesses gravitate into whatever ideology they were naturally predisposed to.

  I was mesmerized by a Meet the Press segment Tim Russert showed. The theory is that politics has not much to do with political ideology and philsophy. Rather, it is an outcome of a lifestyle choice. Iceberg v. arugula. Beer vs. wine. If they have access to your grocery store purchases, you can be targeted for party preference based on brands of toothpaste, deodorant, ice cream, shampoo, Coke v. Pepsi. It scares me b/c I was so progr. in my consumer brands. It left me confused.

  I've heard similar arguments before, but the only explanations that have any credibility and have been scientifically confirmed, are the neuropsychological ones. They emphasize differences in the structure of the brain between people who identify themselves as Liberal or Conservatives. These differences in turn are very likely to be genetically based. The basic findings are:

  • Conservatives are much more prone to fear than Liberals. This has been verified not only through psychological tests but through MRI brain scans. The portions of the brain that handle fear-the amygdala-is actually larger in Conservatives than in Liberals.
  • Conservatives have smaller Anterior Cingulate than Liberals. That portion of the brain is responsible for optimism.
  • Conservatives are also more easily disgusted by potentially offensive objects and concepts than Liberals.
  • Liberals are more adept than Conservatives in handling informational complexity, ambiguity and novelty.
  • Liberals tend to be "right brained" which makes them more creative and less rigid. Conservatives, on the other hand tend to be "left brained" making them more semantically rigid. That makes them word and language centered as opposed to a multidimensional, holistic view of the world. In extreme cases this linguistic, one dimensional, style of thinking disconnects them from the external world. In extreme cases this causes Conservative mind to acquire a psychotic, quasi-solipsistic world view. Essentially, they start living in their minds.

  Another psychological difference between the two is that the Conservative mind set seems to be more limited in scope, socially and naturalistically, than the Liberal one.

  • Socially speaking and in order of importance, Conservatives are only concerned with family, friends and to a lower degree pseudo tribes such as Church and Nation. Their altruism extends to their religion and nation but only to the extent that their religion is homogenous and their concept of nation extends primarily to those within their ideological sphere. However, such concern does not apply to the general world outside. People outside of their nation, with the exception of political allies, are mere gibbering objects to be either ignored or conquered and plundered.
  • Naturalistically, Conservatives only care about their lawns and those in the neighborhood. Or, if they happened to have been raised in a forest or rural area then they'll have an interest in it. Any natural area well outside of their territory could as well be a nuclear slag heap so long as they don't get any ill effects from it.

  • Liberals on the other hand, have the same concern that Conservatives have as to family, friends and compatriots. However, they do not have the sharp drop off that Conservatives have in relation to others outside their social/political sphere. They do not objectify the rest of the world as much as Conservatives. Hence, a more altruistic predisposition.
  • Liberals have the same parallel sentiments as regards to the Naturalistic world. They do not have the sharp drop off that Conservatives have in concern to their environment. More concern is shown to natural disturbances throughout the world. Hence, a greater predisposition towards environmentalism.

  In conclusion, as far as the Social and Naturalistic worlds are concerned, Conservatives live in a psychologically restricted bubble. Liberals have a more expansive view.

  I'm curious what other people think.

  Glad to be of service.
• 
  40

  How Would You Recommend Getting Rid Of Jehovah's Witnesses?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ....at your door?.

  my gf mistakenly took brochures/pamphlets and now they drop things in the doorway every week (at least).. any suggestions?

  ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Pin this to your front door with one of their pamphlets in its hands.

  
• 
  76

  After Exiting the Witnesses - Are you O.K. Not Knowing about the Future ?

  by flipper in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it seems that religion has always been considered the opium of the people.

  or at least many tend to gravitate towards religion to have or solidify some sort of future with a supreme being overlooking them hoping to have a reward either in heaven or in the jehovah's witnesses case - living forever in a " paradise earth ".

  it seems that people can't just live day to day and let each day come to them with whatever happens.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Flipper:

  MRS. JONES- I agree. I don't need to know the future either. Here and now is good for me.

  Flipper; with all respect and sincerity let me ask you. Do you have grandchildren. "Here and now" is not going to be "good" at all for all of us in the coming 10 years.
• 
  76

  After Exiting the Witnesses - Are you O.K. Not Knowing about the Future ?

  by flipper in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it seems that religion has always been considered the opium of the people.

  or at least many tend to gravitate towards religion to have or solidify some sort of future with a supreme being overlooking them hoping to have a reward either in heaven or in the jehovah's witnesses case - living forever in a " paradise earth ".

  it seems that people can't just live day to day and let each day come to them with whatever happens.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Sinis:

  "More than a realist... I have friends who are pretty high up in intel agencys for the "beast" - shits getting crazy..."

  Sinis, could you be more specific and is it merely in regards to economic conditions?
• 
  37

  Is Armageddon a REAL EVENT to the GB like 9/11 is to the rest of us?

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  all of us are aware of the startling and terrifying events of 2001, or 9/11 as it is commonly termed.. airplanes were hijacked and flown into the world trade center killing over a thousand innocent people.. this experience is vivid enough in our memory and consciousness so that it can serve as a significant illustration of what follows.. .

  now i want you to imagine that you and a group of your friends received ironclad evidence ahead of the 9/11 event.

  the evidence is from.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Before answering the question, there is a huge psychological difference between an actual event in the past that you personally experienced; an event in the past that you observed from a distance and did not impact you personally; and an event in the future that, regardless of the sincerity of the believer, is nonetheless psychologically distant.

  Do women fear rape? Of course. But do they take the precautions against it that they would if another woman in the vicinity (work or neighborhood) got raped. No they do not until such an event happens and "personalizes" the previously hypothetical threat.

  Even such a scenario pales into insignificance if she gets raped herself. That is when precautions are maximized.

  This analogy applies to any scenario that would affect individuals, social or non-human (Natural disasters, for example).

  "Armageddon" or the "Great Tribulation", even if they were considered viable threats would still seem distant and nowhere as threatening compared to an immediate or current threat to their safety.

  "Armageddon" or the "Great Tribulation", even if they were considered viable threats, would still seem distant and nowhere as threatening compared to an immediate or current threat to their safety.

  Of course, what I just explained above is moot as far as the Governing Body is concerned. Even if they actually had sincere beliefs, which I doubt, they would be so burned out on their own hoopla that they're not going to take any of the measures indicated by Terry. To the extent that they may have been sincere they have, nonetheless, been crying wolf to themselves; as well as the rest of the sheep.
• 
  205

  The Christian Onslaught

  by satinka in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  *sigh* i have been noticing lately there are a number of groups of "christians" signing up as members of this forum, with the obvious agenda of gaining converts for their own cult-like religions.

  i have been wondering things like:.

  hmmm...maybe i'll try ignoring them.. thank you simon for the space to vent.. satinka.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Godrulz:

  "Christianity is a personal relationship with the Living God, ultimate freedom, love, life. Religion is a snare, a manmade, devilish trap that keeps people from God."

  Sorry bud, but religion, in the general and meaningful sense of the word, includes all forms of worship and perceived relationships with God(s)REGARDLESS of whether an organized church is involved or not.

  The egocentric and intellectual manipulations being made by the individual do not require institutions, just personal self deception.

  Your personal God, as the Canadian Neurologist Michael Persinger discovered, is simply part of the human ego speaking to another part of itself without being the least bit aware that its message is coming from within. Thus the whole "spiritual" experience is erroneously perceived as coming from outside the ego.

  You're actually being puppeteered by your unconscious. When its thoughts go through your conscious mind and out of your mouth, you then begin to interact with your concept - your "God".

  Man writing the "Word of God"

  
• 
  205

  The Christian Onslaught

  by satinka in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  *sigh* i have been noticing lately there are a number of groups of "christians" signing up as members of this forum, with the obvious agenda of gaining converts for their own cult-like religions.

  i have been wondering things like:.

  hmmm...maybe i'll try ignoring them.. thank you simon for the space to vent.. satinka.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terra Incognita

  Godrulz:

  "Christians worship and exalt the Sovereign Lord Jesus/Jehovah and are not guilty of making Him in our image or treating Him like a puppet. Rail against the WT, but you cannot do the same against biblical Christianity."

  You're being dense, God. I wasn't so much ranting against the Bitchtower as I was giving an example of my general thoughts. You can claim exemption from this Universal rule all you want but:

  All religious and ideological people are puppeteers

  .

  of their "God(s)" and/or ideas and principles.

  .

  That includes you buddy!

  .