Max Divergent

Joined

• started 33 topics
• posted 580 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Max Divergent

• 
  4

  Doing law...

  by Max Divergent in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  while in a rare posting mood, may i just brag say that i scored the 99th percentile (top 1%) in the australian law school admission test of all candidates since 1996 recently!!!

  i start the 3-year graduate course at deakin uni part-time external in next month.. i think there are some other budding lawyers out there too...whom shall we sue?

  cheers, max.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Max Divergent
• 
  19

  I love you - do I?

  by donkey in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  rather than participate in the thread asking if people really loved jehovah i have a different question to ask but it requires a contextual setting prior to being considered.

  many posters here at one time loved jehovah and we know our concept of jehovah was that which was created as a result of wt teachings - only to find out that the teachings had no factual basis.

  we can also observe people all over the world who worship idols or nature or other gods such as allah or vishnu etc and we know that these people are in love with a god who is not true - if their beliefs about who god is are untrue then they are logically in love with a concept as opposed to a real person or spirit being.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Max Divergent

  Oh, I would have thought Love is somthing that can exist within oneself without he object of that love being a physical reality, or another entity capable of feeling love in return.

  Just because the god turns out to be unreal dosn't cancel out the devotion or whatever a person felt and expressed and acted out while they beleived in that God.

  Maybe it was a Love of less practical usefulness that a love of a real entity (of a lover, or your parents or whoever), but it was real while it lasted, I wouldn't devalue that experience in anyway.

  Just becuse the object of our affection/devotion proves to be not to our expectation dosn't mean we didn't honour them with our love and experience that as a real thing - I think it'd be a waste of a precious thing if we wrote off good things as a result of disapointment.

  There aren't many good things in the world, why write off the goodness in what we experience, even if all our hopes aren't fulfilled?

  I say, enjoy the love of god that was experienced, place it high, and move on in seeking out more goodness to love freely, without inhabition, without regret and without second-guessing what was given freely and with joy for a benifit that might have now passed.
• 
  19

  I love you - do I?

  by donkey in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  rather than participate in the thread asking if people really loved jehovah i have a different question to ask but it requires a contextual setting prior to being considered.

  many posters here at one time loved jehovah and we know our concept of jehovah was that which was created as a result of wt teachings - only to find out that the teachings had no factual basis.

  we can also observe people all over the world who worship idols or nature or other gods such as allah or vishnu etc and we know that these people are in love with a god who is not true - if their beliefs about who god is are untrue then they are logically in love with a concept as opposed to a real person or spirit being.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Max Divergent

  I'm not sure I see a real link or dependecy between the concepts of God and Love, and find it hard to think that an emotion can be transfered or flow between individuals, as opposed to emotion being somthing developed within as a reslt of nature/nurture/somthing else/whatever... I can't MAKE you feel anything, nor can you MAKE me feel anything ...

  You might be loving toward me, but I'll choose whether to be loving back or not... given donkey's aren't to my preference, chances are I'd run like hell whatever sort of advance you made ... but there are others here who might react differently... :-)

  Cheers, Max
• 
  4

  Doing law...

  by Max Divergent in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  while in a rare posting mood, may i just brag say that i scored the 99th percentile (top 1%) in the australian law school admission test of all candidates since 1996 recently!!!

  i start the 3-year graduate course at deakin uni part-time external in next month.. i think there are some other budding lawyers out there too...whom shall we sue?

  cheers, max.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Max Divergent

  While in a rare posting mood, may I just brag say that I scored the 99th percentile (top 1%) in the Australian Law School Admission Test of all candidates since 1996 recently!!! I start the 3-year graduate course at Deakin Uni part-time external in next month.

  I think there are some other budding lawyers out there too...whom shall we sue? :-)

  Cheers, Max
• 
  4

  Also got me bloody well thinking...

  by dustyb in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was just sittin here, readin my girlfriends letter (she's a jw) and she says she is so confused over the truth in a lot of things (including religion).

  and it made me think about my elders study.

  he was talking with me and brought up two mighty fine points that go strictly against the wt society.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Max Divergent

  Well dusty, coincidences, coincidences...

  We watched the same 1970's movie within 12 hours of each other - Full Metal Jacket (my Mrs was puzzled about the arse rooting 'without the curtosy of a reach-around' :-) had to stimulate simulate); we have an amazingly similar thread title for consecutive posts :-), and are both starting to study law... I start the 3 year graduate course in Feb.

  Well, well well.. :-)

  Max

  PS: Elder sounds like a reasonable guy, better watch out - he'll be DF'd...
• 
  2

  Got me bloody well thinking...

  by Max Divergent in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was visiting at a hospital and was in the elevator with a patient who was being transfused with a bag of bright red blood on the way back from an operation; i was mildly surprised to see the patient was old sister barbara who used to have our book study at her house!

  i guessed it was cell saver blood as it's deemed ok against acts 15, but it was still weird to see a sis getting a blood transfusion.

  it got me to thinking how a simple statement in acts (and the other scriptures) could be the source of so many (illogical but un-challengeable/un-discussable) rules and fine distinctions (enforced by strict penalties) as defined and amended from time to time in the watchtower...

  1. 
  2. 
• 

  Max Divergent

  I was visiting at a hospital and was in the elevator with a patient who was being transfused with a bag of bright red blood on the way back from an operation; I was mildly surprised to see the patient was old Sister Barbara who used to have our book study at her house!

  I guessed it was Cell Saver blood as it's deemed OK against Acts 15, but it was still weird to see a Sis getting a blood transfusion. It got me to thinking how a simple statement in Acts (and the other scriptures) could be the source of so many (illogical but un-challengeable/un-discussable) rules and fine distinctions (enforced by strict penalties) as defined and amended from time to time in The Watchtower...

  Possibilities

  The research that came as a result of that and other things led me down the road of pondering (my navel and) some possibilities about life and the universe and everything...

  1. Jehovah exists just as he's described by the WTS (in which case I'll take the Second Death thanks... no eternity under the Elders for me please...)

  2. Jehovah exists but the WTS are just one of the (more conservative/simple) ways of worshiping Him (suits some, not me)

  3. Jehovah doesn?t exist, or exists but is very different to how the WTS describe Him (which amounts to the same thing for all practical purposes)

  I reckoned that given those possibilities, leaving the JW's was a no-brainer really.

  In the end, like at the [figurative] Pearly Gates :-), it really wouldn?t matter... and once that idea sets foot, it defeats one of their central control points for adherents - they say it matters (in an eternal sense) if you leave, when it probably doesn?t (except for the family and other human traumas...).

  Thank god I?m out... nearly five years now.

  Take care, Max

  (I think I posted somthing similar once before)
• 
  52

  When you were a dub.....did you ever fall asleep when you prayed in bed?

  by gumby in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  well i did .....all the time.

  it always bothered me that i couldn't even stay awake to thank my god.

  i found out later many did the same.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Max Divergent

  One of the best ways to get to sleep, I always found...

  Bothered me till I figured it wasn't really a prayer till you said 'In Jesus name, Amen' at the end... then I was just glad to get to sleep quicker

  Even when I believed, I usually felt silly praying, especially the ritualistic one for meals at home.
• 
  20

  Woman Refuses Blood Transfusion--Attacked by Son--Is He Guilty of Murder

  by blondie in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/local/scn-sa-nor.arraignment2jan03,0,1830775.story?coll=stam-news-local-headlines

  man arrested in mother's murder on suicide watch by martin b. cassidy.

  staff writer.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Max Divergent

  To say that he's not guilty becuase of some special feature of the victim is to say that people who are different to the mainstream have a lower level of protection from violence in the law. It also puts blame on the vicitm for the outcome of the violent attack.

  If Mr Average Joe gets deliberatly stabbed once and dies, his attacker is guilty of murder becuase stabbing someone is an act that an ordinary person would expect might cause death, even though it usually dosn't (assuming there's no defence like insanty, self-defence etc).

  If Mr Heamophilliac Joe gets deliberatly stabbed once and dies, is his attacker to be let off murder just becuase someone else might not have died? If so, the law provides Heamophilliac Joe with less protection from murderers that his buddy Average Joe and thus he is given less protection from attackers by the law.

  The only differnence is that the JW makes a choice and the heamophilliac dosn't. But it's a choice she's entitled to make, so the attacker becomes a murderer as a result of his own violent actions - no one else is to blame, and especially not the victim.

  We don't reduce the culpibility of cop killers becuse cops put themselves in harms way by their job choice.

  As it happens in this case anyhow, the attacker must have known that she woudn't take a transfusion which finally puts rest to any attempt to reduce his culpability (notwithstanding he may have a defence in insanity) on the blood transfusion issue. But it's really not at issue anyway to my way of thinking.

  As someone else suggested, just becuse we beleive differently to somone else, we get no discount off the lawful punishment if we kill them.

  Max
• 
  35

  JWs and voting. Is it okay now?

  by NikL in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i know there has been lots of discussion on this issue in the past year but i have been unable to find it.

  i need to know where to find the questions from readers that talked about it being okay for people to vote if their concience allows.

  i brought this issue up with a couple of people, one a rank and file dub and the other an elder.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Max Divergent

  The WTS have done the best they could do here, IMO...

  In the Mexico/Malawi party card issue, the WTS gave Mexican's advice that let them off the hook and the Malawian's advise that got them in prison or worse. At least they're giving everyone the 'Mexican solution' if the troubles they face are too great to just stay at home on poling day.

  If someone were under duress (wife of an apostate, say :-), then they're not going to make life harder by insiting she 'take a stand' on the issue if, as they say, their religious issue is actually casting the vote and going into the booth dosn't mean you actually did cast a valid vote.

  There's no doubt in my mind that if someone in a free country under no duress or compulsion volenterilly went to the polling booth out of choice they'd be in front of a Judicial Committee, or at least not be used for privilages, becuase the article dosn't cancel out what's been written before, it just gives some escape clauses for tough situations.

  Some reasonableness from them on this point!!

  Max
• 
  113

  Witnesses coming Saturday... I need HELP!!!!

  by Globetrotter in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i got into a rather heated discussion this morning with my unbaptised but raised jehovah's witness wife.

  we discussed so many things: feb 1 watchtower article on 607 and 1914, the un, beth sarim, blood, god's mouthpiece here on earth, etc.

  this was yet another attempt on my part to try to plant a seed of doubt.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Max Divergent

  Just my thoughts.... my Mrs still has her moments of wanting to beleive. But I recognise that it's not the religion she wants, it's belonging, acceptance, a hope (dream) and stuff like that. I need to be able to provide those things from a worldly source.

  One of the problems with talking about the problems with the WTS (607/1914/1975, blood, UN NGO, abuse, etc etc etc) is that there's a 'word answer' to everything. By that I mean a set of words which you can't prove to be wrong that, if true, would resolve the problem.

  The ultimate, last resort 'word answer' is '...well, we'll have to wait on Jehovah to sort that one out...'. You can't prove that this is wrong, silly, imporssible, won't work or anything else! If true, it would (supposedly) fix any problem at all!!

  I'd suggest that you'd be better off to talk about how you want your life at home to be, not their religion.

  Think of three things you want at home - not three things you DON'T want, but three things you can get... You and your wife to do a Community college course together, go to Vegas one weekend soon, go camping, hiking, or work cleaning up a river once a month, equal time on religion - 5 minutes of JW talk to you or the kids gives you 5 minutes to say what you want to, ... whatever's achievable in your house.

  Why not cancel the elders, get out the barbie, cook up a fatty, tasty brunch with bacon and hash drowns and all that, brew some special coffee from Brazil or someplace and just talk with your wife and kids about how you want to live (not how bad the religion is)?

  Maybe pack a suitcase and book a hotel room too, just in case... if things are that bad, then you can only be prepared for the worst case if you expect it to happen and have a plan to live through it.

  Take care, Max