Posts by Jonathan Drake

55

SHUNNING - Unchristian Psychological Torture

by EdenOne in

some time ago, i wrote an extensive article on shunning and published it on my website.

since that website had views on doctrinal matters that no longer reflect my current stand, i took the website down.

however, my views on this matter are still current, and for the benefit of everyone here, i'm going to post the article here.

Jonathan Drake

Lisa Rose,

anymore I generally try to stay out of bible debate because it's all interpretation. But you're factually wrong about the bible not encouraging shunning.

there are direct references in the old testament which I already referred to, where it says one should be "cut off" from amongst the people. Watchtower falsely states this to mean killed - it does not mean killed. If they would study history and use the Hebrew term as it is meant, they'd actually have an argument for shunning that's scripturally based. Because that's what is happening, a person is shunned and sent to a city ostracized from family and friends.

No, the bible does not justify what the Watchtower does, which is to break up families, hurt people who are going through difficult times and shut down those with valid concerns, all to protect the hierarchy of a cult.

This is just blatently untrue. Peter, as an apostle, literally kills a couple for holding back some of their money and pretending to give a lot to the early Christian congregation. This is way worse than shunning, I'd take shunning over this any day. So if we are going to try to use the bible to show shunning is wrong maybe we should stop, lest they start ACTUALLY killing people and follow Peters example.

55

SHUNNING - Unchristian Psychological Torture

by EdenOne in

some time ago, i wrote an extensive article on shunning and published it on my website.

since that website had views on doctrinal matters that no longer reflect my current stand, i took the website down.

however, my views on this matter are still current, and for the benefit of everyone here, i'm going to post the article here.

Jonathan Drake

Al these posts just to claim that you're interpretation is right and someone else's is wrong.

you can't actually prove shunning is unscriptural. Doesn't matter how many words you use, or what the Greeks did.

jesus said he came to fulfill the law, part of that law was for sinners to be "cut off from amongst gods people". Jesus never said this shouldn't be done, nor did he ever abolish the law - he claims in the bible to have come specifically not to replace the law, indicating it should still stand.

and the law called for a "cutting off" or a separation from the whole in cases of wrong doing. Special cities were built in Israel for these shunned and exiled people to go live.

You cannot prove shunning is unscriptural or wrong. All you can claim is that you believe it is and base that on your interpretation of words that can be made to mean anything.

238

Another mass shooting, three or four hours ago.

by James Mixon in

san bernardino california.

up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.

disabilities.

Jonathan Drake

I wish they'd stop with this "self radicalized" nonsense. Call it like it is - they already had the seed of extremism planted with their faith. There is a clear external factor in all these independent attacks.

This is really grinding my nerves as well. How is it going over anyone's head that the Koran easily sanctions this. Why is our leadership so afraid to recognize the real problem and deal with it?

3

Stuart Anderson Nobel Peace prize

by poopie in

jw
friends

yes

Jonathan Drake

Are you referring to Angus Stewart by chance? The counsel for the Royal comission. (I may have misspelled is last name)

238

Another mass shooting, three or four hours ago.

by James Mixon in

san bernardino california.

up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.

disabilities.

Jonathan Drake

Billy blobber: Islam is not a race

I'm glad we agree. Islam is a terrible religion and needs ridiculed and reasoned with. Apologists and Muslims that claim to be peaceful need shown that their faith is unreliable and that the religion is responsible for all interpretations of its book both good and bad.

This is not racism, or islamaphobia. It's just true.

238

Another mass shooting, three or four hours ago.

by James Mixon in

san bernardino california.

up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.

disabilities.

Jonathan Drake

The shooting at the abortion clinic was an act of terrorism, for christian ideas. This nonsense needs to be worked out of our society as does ideas of any other religion that basis its belief on outdated ideas of hatred and murder.

SLOW CLAP

And for those posting about Islam as a race - it is not. It is absolutely not a race. It is a religion made up of many different races all around the world just like Christianity.

238

Another mass shooting, three or four hours ago.

by James Mixon in

san bernardino california.

up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.

disabilities.

Jonathan Drake

I agree with every point Simon just made.

And he brings up the NRA, which is a great point. I've rarely noticed a time when anyone on "anti-gun law" side wasn't jumping straight to the extreme and fighting a gun ban. I don't think anyone is actually advocating a complete ban on all fire arms.

I like what Bernie Sanders has been saying about gun laws, he doesn't support a ban, just wonders why in the world anyone needs and assault rifle and why a loophole exists for gun shows - and these are wonderful points.

The NRA gets people all worked up about the second amendment and, "you can't take or guns!" But nobody wants to take your guns, what they want is to make ONLY assault weapons and such guns as only exist for killing human beings illegal. That's what is needed and wanted.

34

Hypothetical question. There is no more guns on our streets, would the crime rate go down?

by James Mixon in

jw
friends

it would eliminate drive by's (gangs).

bank robbery.

( handing the bank teller a note, this is stick up without a gun).

Jonathan Drake

Making guns illegal would not take them off the streets.

Crime would not go down.

gun related crime would go down.

CRIME would not.

gun related crime would not END, but go down.

what would disappear is mass shooting sprees. Not gun crime, not crime itself. And that's good enough.

238

Another mass shooting, three or four hours ago.

by James Mixon in

san bernardino california.

up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.

disabilities.

Jonathan Drake

Jonathan Drake:
"We definitely need better gun laws."
California, where the recent shootings took place, has stringent gun laws. Even semi-autos with a fixed non-detachable 10 round magazine capacity are prohibited.

This is a good point, the only rebuttal I can think of to apply is:

More strict gun laws do nothing if a person can just cross a state line and get what they want and go home. What we need is a nationwide standard.

After any future change to the nations laws on guns, the immediate effect will likely be nothing. What I said in my previous post would apply here as well, which is that many people already have guns that are now disallowed and how do you take these away? There's no way to do this.

what will have to be done is trust the ones that already have them until said trust is broken and then take every gun they own, while making it impossible to obtain outlawed guns without resorting to extremely expensive means that undermine the time and effort put into getting them.

the prohibition wouldn't be an example that fits in this scenario because not ALL guns need outlawed.

many would oppose outlawing any gun at all, and to that opposition I always point out that their inevitable argument, that we need to be able to rise up against the government, doesn't work because drones and tanks. No assault rifle is going to help fight drones and tanks or a navy blowing up Rebels from the sea.

Hence I say, take away the guns that literally are only for killing other human beings, keep hunting rifles and pistols - no automatics or extended rounds, no guns allowed to be sold at gun shows ever, no guns for any person born in another country regardless of citizenship, no guns for anyone who hasn't graduated highschcol, no guns for anyone who's ever been drug or alcohol dependent, no guns for anyone who's ever been diagnosed with any mental issue - and I'm sure I could add on to this list.

i would also add that any person who is part of any religion, should be classified as a person suffering a mental delusion IMO. But that's just my opinion and will probably never be realized.

238

Another mass shooting, three or four hours ago.

by James Mixon in

san bernardino california.

up to 12 people have been killed.. the center a private non-profit agency that assists people with developmental.

disabilities.

Jonathan Drake

I believe what they need is better laws not out right bans.

in America we once had prohibition, a period of time where alcohol was banned. It's what led to the rise of the mob and organized crime.

if you ban guns it's only going to create an atmosphere where that can happen again IMO. The crimes being committed by people with guns are systemic of other issues in society - not the availability of guns.

take this latest issue. What ultimately caused this shooting? It wasn't the gun, it was the ludicrous religion that for some reason is tolerated and protected in society that did this.

The questions being asked are all wrong. It's not why aren't we banning guns, it's why aren't we dealing with religions that are divisive? Why aren't we doing better to provide jobs and fight unemployment and poverty?

We definitely need better gun laws. But these shootings are not happening because people can get guns.