Jonathan Drake

Joined

• started 28 topics
• posted 710 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Jonathan Drake

• 
  12

  LOL Deut 13:1-5

  by Jonathan Drake in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  omg i've never read this before or if i did i never caught it... .

  13 [a]if a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder,2 and the sign or the wonder comes true, concerning which he spoke to you, saying, let us go after other gods (whom you have not known) and let us serve them, 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams; for the lord your god is testing you to find out if you love the lord your god with all your heart and with all your soul.

  4 you shall follow the lordyour god and fear him; and you shall keep his commandments, listen to his voice, serve him, and cling to him.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  It's all about control.
  

  This is exactly my point.
• 
  12

  LOL Deut 13:1-5

  by Jonathan Drake in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  omg i've never read this before or if i did i never caught it... .

  13 [a]if a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder,2 and the sign or the wonder comes true, concerning which he spoke to you, saying, let us go after other gods (whom you have not known) and let us serve them, 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams; for the lord your god is testing you to find out if you love the lord your god with all your heart and with all your soul.

  4 you shall follow the lordyour god and fear him; and you shall keep his commandments, listen to his voice, serve him, and cling to him.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  Omg I've never read this before or if I did I never caught it...

  13 “[a]If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder,2 and the sign or the wonder comes true, concerning which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us go after other gods (whom you have not known) and let us serve them,’ 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams; for the Lord your God is testing you to find out if you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 You shall follow the Lordyour God and fear Him; and you shall keep His commandments, listen to His voice, serve Him, and cling to Him. 5 But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has [b]counseled [c]rebellion against the Lord your God who brought you from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of [d]slavery, to seduce you from the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from among you.

  So let's get this straight.. Really think about this for those of you who still believe. God directed this prophet to test the people and lead them astray, it does say this- it says this prophets words and accurate prophecies are a test from God. But the direction is to stone him to death for, apparently, DOING WHAT HE WAS TOLD BY GOD.

  
  

  Think about it. Why do you think such a prophet would have been killed? Could it be that there is no God and this was a contingency plan for times when a person makes up a story that comes true who isn't part of the Yahweh sect?
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

  "oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

  you're fired!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  @cofty

  thanks I added them to my Amazon list. I'll order them soon as there's some money in a week or so.
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

  "oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

  you're fired!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  I assumed you would feel that way; that is a Libertarian view. It has no data or evidence to support it, however. After initial push-back, society typically begins accepting social changes much quicker than it otherwise would.
  

  Well, can't deny an established pattern. Maybe this law will be good then, could escalate society to a better place faster.

  id be interested in learning things like this, have any suggestions on good reads? (Referring to society springing back after push back, that kind of behavior)
• 
  28

  Attending memorial tomorrow?

  by Ghiagirl in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  this is my first year i will not attend memorial.

  to be honest if it wasn't for my husband i would probably be going still.

  he says what's the point, don't be one of those people who doesn't give a sh** but just shows there face once a year.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  I joked today about showing up and pooping in a chair, but I now think it'd be far funnier to pee in the wine.
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  The thing is that God allowed them to misinterpret the bibles message slightly while still keeping the original message that humans need the Lord.
  

  What!?... Just... What!? This doesn't throw up huge red flags for you at all?

  The thing that many people just cannot see is the historical references from the bible such as the circle of the earth.
  

  the ancient people had two very big and very obvious reasons to assert the earth was a circle, the sun and the moon. It's not a huge leap to imagine they too lived on such a circle.

  But here's the thing. those dead sea scrolls, which no one edited or changed was found in the 20th century and contains the same text as the Hebrew bible. So no man could change it because it's sacred text.
  

  This is not something you can accurately assert. The Dead Sea scrolls could be copies of older books made for preservation, and likely were. How can you assert that no changes were made to them? You can't possibly know.

  Further, how do you account for the known spurious additions to the bible that were believed as legitimate for thousands of years, even still by many- yet these were additions, changes, to your so called sacred text. Not only this, but the NWT has scriptures which meaning were changed entirely by its translators. You may choose to ignore it, but the evidence is overwhelming that the so called sacred texts were changed significantly.

  I could even point to your own post... How can you say in one sentence that God allowed men to misinterpret the bible slightly but then just a few lines down from this claim that the sacred texts were never changed? You just said God let his message be misinterpreted so was it changed or not because it can't be both ways....
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  @ Marvin

  to be fair even the Jews much later didn't really stick to just pouring out the blood. Around Jesus time there were people who would collect blood running down the drain from the sacrifices and then sell it as fertilizer, making a profit.

  I think I see where you're coming from now maybe, but I think it's a point that you'd really struggle to make with witnesses. As a witness I would have just said the point remains the sacred nature of life, the blood being respected was just a symbol of that sacredness. It really wasn't about the blood, it was about the life. Blood was being used as a symbol of life.

  I would also have argued that the expounding on this law later by Moses showed that people weren't respecting life as much as they should have and so more specific restrictions were set. But blood was never the issue, it was only used as a symbol.

  That would be my argument. I think coftys OP does a good job of sidestepping all such rebuttals.
  
  
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  @Marvin

  i feel really dumb, but for some reason I am not following. I don't see a difference between Gen 9:4, 5 and Lev 17:14. I think I get what you are saying, you can never FULLY drain blood right? Watchtower has addressed that line of reasoning though. I don't remember where, but I remember reading it.
• 
  556

  The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

  it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

  they take pride in obedience.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  Personally, I think the OP is great. I've brought up this subject a few different ways and was met with opposition. Establishing that common ground might just do the trick better than coming off instantly with opposition, no matter how reasonable the opposition.

  @Marvin, it was only the blood and not the flesh that was seen as having the life in it. I have no idea why that is so specific, but Cofty is right. It's in Leviticus 17:14. How they rationalized eating the flesh as not part of it I don't know, that's a good question.

  @pressmen how can the bible be inspired? It tells the story of a flood which we can prove never happened. Depending on your belief you might believe the earth is only 6000 years old, which is demonstrably wrong. The book of Daniel was likely written in something like the 160s BCE? So every prophecy in it is AFTER the fact. The bible itself, in Hebrews 11 says that faith is the assured expectation of something not seen - it's accepting something about which there is no proof. But when the proof, the real evidence, is stacked AGAINST the bible then why do we need faith at all?

  In my experience, you're likely to have rationalization a for all of this and anything else I could think of; so bible discussions are pointless until you see it for yourself IMO. I think researching evolution would open your eyes, it did mine.
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".

  "oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?

  you're fired!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jonathan Drake

  @DJS let me try to say what I meant differently.... *thinking...

  Okay so I was saying kind of I think what you're saying here:

  Within a generation or so this will be a moot point. Gay marriage and equal access will be the norm, and people in the future will look back at the haters in 2015 and compare them to the KKK and other 20th Century hate mongers. And that's not an opinion.
  

  The difference being, in my opinion, this law and any like it that come, along with the attitudes that support it, will slow down the inevitable outcome you spell out here. It's an outcome I agree is inevitable, I think though that this sort of thing happening (this law and these attitudes that support it) actively push back the date that inevitability is realized. What if by the time we, as a people, are finally at that point of enlightenment it's too late?

  im not sure, but re-reading your posts I think I'm mostly agreeing with your point. I just don't know what libertarians or x-tians are.