Posts by NeonMadman

Isn't that group a Watchtower offshoot? The name rings a bell from J. Gordon Melton's old Encyclopedia of American Religions, which at the time it came out was probably the most comprehensive listing of religious groups in the country. Somehow, I thought he had classed it as a JW splinter group.

Do they still exist? Do you know how to get info on them? Always interested in following ex-Watchtower groups...

Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan

13

What was your JW wedding song?

by NikL in

jw
friends

i got to thinking the other day about how jws, at least when i got married in the hall could not use secular music for the ceremony.

we there fore were forced to use kingdon melodies.

anyone else have fond memories about your wedding song?.

NeonMadman

For my first marriage, it was "Living Up to Our Name." My ex-wife then spent the next 23 years abusing me and my daughter, later finally committing "porneia" and leaving me because I was an apostate. Of course, the elders went along.

For my second marriage, I was nowhere near a Kingdom Hall, mentally or physically.

Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan

14

An elder called me the other day............

by IWish4Truth in

jw
friends

i have been df'd twice, this time for over 6 months.

an elder called me the other day and wanted to know if i'm renting my house or buying it.

also, he wanted to know who keeps my children while i work.

NeonMadman

Is there anybody who might be interested in contesting the custody of your children, like an ex-spouse who is still a JW? The thrust of the questions sounds to me like he was questioning your ability to care for your children properly. I'm not trying to panic you, but I can't think of another reason for him to ask that sort of question. I hope your response was that it's none of his business, thank you, and why do you want to know anyway? Or, better yet, ask him how his children are cared for when he's away from home.

Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan

David Hasselhoff is the AntiChrist

by NeonMadman in

jw
friends

proof positive at this link!!

check it out!.

http://www.esquilax.com/baywatch/index.shtml.

NeonMadman

Proof positive at this link!! Check it out!

http://www.esquilax.com/baywatch/index.shtml

Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan

15

WT depicts World Trade Center as tool of devil

by Dogpatch in

jw
friends

the watchtower depicted the world trade center as a tool of the devil.. http://www.thetruthhurts.freeservers.com/wtc.htm.

i'm working on some new pages of interesting cuts from the watchtower's book, revelation: its grand climax at hand!.

suggestions welcome.. exjws.net.

NeonMadman

I hate to say that I also don't see the WTC in the scans depicted, and, since my books are still packed from my recent move, can't access a Revelation book in hard copy to get a better look.

But, if these pictures do depict the WTC, wouldn't that count as, in effect, another false prophecy by the Watchtower? After all, the illustrations are depicting destruction at Armageddon, and, obviously, those buildings won't exist then...

(OK, I'm grasping at straws here, but it's fun to think up this stuff.)

Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan

10

Do you think that...

by crochunter in

jw
friends

some people that come here regularly, do so to rationalize the fact that they have left the organization?.

that's kind of how i feel.

we talk about false prophecies, etc that the wtbts has done in the past, but if you believe the bible is real, isn't someone right?

NeonMadman

Since most of the replies to your question are written from the standpoint of having rejected both the doctrines of the JWs and the Bible itself, I thought I would just inject that there are still many of us who do believe the Bible to be God's Word, and the JWs' teachings do not hold up even from that standpoint. If you just read the Bible, without looking up explanations in the Watchtower publications, you'll quickly come to realize that the Watchtower's doctrines simply do not hold water, even from a strictly Biblical standpoint.

The Society has even admitted as much! Back in the 1981 Watchtower, in railing against the "apostates," they said:

*** w81 8/15 28-9 Serving Jehovah "Shoulder to Shoulder" ***
They say that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such 'Bible reading,' they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentaries by Christendom's clergy were teaching 100 years ago

In other words, if you just read the Bible, you'll end up believing what the churches of Christendom teach!

but if you believe the bible is real, isn't someone right? Whether it's the Mormons, JW or whoever.

This sounds like the oft-repeated mantra of the JWs, 'but where would we go if we left Jehovah's organization?' Which of course means, 'what other organization has the truth?' The Bible does not advocate that we look for an organization that has the truth; it tells us that Jesus Christ is "the way, the truth, and the life." And of course, when Peter asked the question that the JWs have so often misquoted,

John 6:68 Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God."

he was referring to Jesus himself, not some organization, as having "words of eternal life".

Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan

42

WTS TO END MAILED SUBSCRIPTIONS

by Seeker4 in

jw
friends

just heard that the society is going to stop mailed subscriptions.

magazines will all have to be picked up at the kingdom hall.

not sure when it's starting, but soon, i suppose.. sorry if this has been posted before, but i think this is very new info.

NeonMadman

One of the big reasons for me to have a subscription when I was a JW was that the subscription copies arrived sometimes as much as two weeks before the distributor copies at the KH. Gotta get that fresh spiritual food as soon as possible, y'know? Besides, if you read it as soon as it came, you could impress everybody at the Hall with your superior knowledge...

Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan

42

WTS TO END MAILED SUBSCRIPTIONS

by Seeker4 in

jw
friends

just heard that the society is going to stop mailed subscriptions.

magazines will all have to be picked up at the kingdom hall.

not sure when it's starting, but soon, i suppose.. sorry if this has been posted before, but i think this is very new info.

NeonMadman

I'm wondering if this is an absolute, or just a "recommendation." A number of years ago the Society 'encouraged' publishers to get their mags at the KH rather than by subscription, and, if I am not mistaken, they said right up front that they were making this recommendation because mailing costs had risen so high. Later on, they retracted the recommendation and again invited publishers to have their own subscriptions. However, subscriptions never ceased to be available to those who really wanted them. Is this another deal like that, or are subscriptions actually being eliminated entirely? What is the situation in other countries where this has been implemented?

Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan

5

Commenting NeonMadman on the trinity

by Rev BII in

jw
friends

neonmadman wrote:.

re: the bible teaches jesus is jehovah?

nov 27, 2001 12:34 .

NeonMadman

OK, here we go...

First of all, Jesus existed before he went to earth. When he said The Son didnt know all God knew, he was speaking generally. Before, as Logos, on earth as Jesus Christ and afterwards as divine King.

You are imputing thoughts to Jesus that are not expressed in the scripture under discussion. Jesus said he did not know the day or the hour, and he said it in the present tense. For you to expand that statement to cover all of his existence is speculation on your part. The scripture does not say that. Tell me, do you believe that Jesus NOW knows the day and the hour? This came up for discussion several times while I was a JW, and I never heard anyone assert that Jesus did not NOW know the day and the hour. Obviously, then,Mark 13:32 applies to the time at which it was said, and not to all of eternity.

- I hear the average trinitarian here in a more rude form; 'They are one person and they are 3 three persons and that's the same!! Understand that or burrrnnn!!!' Yes I got it and it's the lack of logic I refute, besides there's no afterlife punishment for the sins of this life :-). Now what can you do with a guy that says so.

First, don't put words into my mouth. I never said anything about anybody 'burrrnnning', nor is it a concept I am very comfortable with, theologically speaking. But we aren't talking about afterlife punishment for sins here. Rather than prove your point, you divert attention to an entirely different topic. If you want to discuss the Trinity doctrine, as we supposedly are, I'm willing. If you want to get into the hellfire discussion, I'll let someone else deal with that.

Second, it is clear from these comments that you definitely don't "got it". You still completely misunderstand the doctrine of the Trinity if you are capable of summing it up as "'They are one person and they are 3 three persons and that's the same!!" That is absolutely not what the Trinity doctrine teaches. The Trinity doctrine teaches that there are three distinct persons who comprise the one God. That is not the same thing as saying that the three persons are one person, or that there are three Gods. If the doctrine actually said what you are trying to make it say, I would agree with you about the lack of logic.

John 8:58 - Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."
- Is basically bad english. God's name isnt I am. It's an expression. I smell manipulation here. I haven't the NWT by me now, but it wouldnt surprise me if it said 'I was', which isnt bad english. Jesus uses the same kind of expression as Jehovah did once. What fantasy you people have in order to back up your lack of logic.

Well, it may be bad English, but the vast majority of Greek scholars, Christian and non-Christian, would disagree with you. The expression in Greek is ego eimi, which literally means "I am". The NWT, by the way, translates the expression as "I have been," which, if you want to get technical, is also not so great English. As I pointed out in my previous remarks, what proves that Jesus was identifying himself as God is the reaction of the listening Jews, who immediately picked up stones to stone him for blasphemy. For a man to claim to be very old, or to have existed before his earthly life was not blasphemy. For a man to claim to be God, however, most certainly was.

Exodus 3:14 God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And he said, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'" (you go figure the translation quizboy)
- Jehovah is who he's most certainly. He uses this expression this time.

We agree that Jehovah uses the name, "I AM" for himself in Exodus 3:14. This, of course, demonstrates the falsity of your previous statement, "God's name isnt I am." I would agree that God's primary name isn't "I Am," but it is a name that He chose to identify himself with in this case, that was familiar to religious Jews centuries later. Hence, the strong reaction when Jesus identified himself in this way.

Your comment to John 17:24, is blatant lies. It has nothing to do with that, it has something to do with how I retrieved the scripturequote, I hardly expect the KJV to support anything I say but I do know the NIV to be manipulative and wont go near it. I believe I used the RSV. I dont use the NWT either, nice try guttermouth. Also, it's very foolish of you to attack me this way as the the meaning I wanted from John 17 was that Jesus spoke to his father about the role he had before creation, all translations express that.

Well, I can't speak to how you retrieved the scripture quote, but it does seem odd to me that you ended up with a translation that appeared to support the point I thought you were trying to make, when most translations do not. If I mischaracterized your motives personally, then I apologize. However, in general terms, I will stand by my statement that

A favorite ploy of JW's is to find the Bible translation that most closely fits the doctrine they want to teach, and use that version exclusively for that scripture, ignoring the readings from other translations that may not be as friendly to their beliefs.

since I have seen Witnesses do this sort of thing time and time again. Even the Society does it in some cases, using translations other than even the NWT if it reads the way they want it to.

Speaking of apologies, I think you owe me one; I feel that all of my comments to you have been reasonable and respectful, and that nothing I have said deserves to earn me the title "guttermouth". Why is it that every person on this board who defends the JW position seems incapable of doing so without name-calling and invective? I guess it's because of the unChristian example set by the Watchtower Society itself when talking about so-called "apostates".

As to the substance of John 17:24, I agree with you that "Jesus spoke to his father about the role he had before creation." However, that in no way disproves the Trinity doctrine, or the deity of Jesus Christ, so what is your point?

Hebrews 8:1 - speaks of Jesus and the Father as separate persons. Rev Bill uses this to 'prove' that the Trinity is untrue, because he misunderstands the doctrine. Jesus and the Father are distinct persons. However, both are God Almighty.
- You believe that nonsense yourself? *lol*

Another favorite JW tactic - when you can't refute an argument, ridicule it.

Yes, I believe that, as have scholars and Christians alike throughout the millenia, even the early church fathers, some of whom studied at the feet of the apostles. I believe it because it is clearly taught in the scriptures that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. It is also taught clearly that there is only one God. What can I conclude, then, except that the three persons make up the one God?

Blind believe here, bad reasoning.

Sorry, you don't get away with that. I have at every point in my argument expressed both reason and scripture in defense of my assertions, while you are the one offering learned reasonings along the lines of, 'you believe that? snicker snicker'. If anyone is guilty of blind belief and bad reasoning, it's you. And you don't get to just categorize someone's argument as bad reasoning and leave it at that; you have to show WHY the reasoning is bad, something you have not even attempted to do.

'Trinitarians do not say that Jesus IS the Father, or that they are the same person. They are distinct persons, along with the Holy Spirit, making up the one God.'
Again I feel sad you believe such nonsense.

More of the same line of attack; instead of actually refuting anything I say, you declare it "nonsense" and wave it away. I feel sad that you are still seeing the world and the Word through Watchtower-colored spectacles, and that you are still in mental bondage to the most clearly identified false prophet of our time.

- much much more easy than that he's one and he's three. Afterall he created us. As I have said before, trinitybelief root in fear and lack of OT founding. There's no trinity in the OT, there's one God.

Again, you mischaracterize the Trinity doctrine. I'd like to believe that you are sincere and that you truly misunderstand what the doctrine teaches, but your mocking tone leads me to wonder whether you are distorting the teaching deliberately, because it's easier to disprove that way.

If you'd like evidence for the Trinity in the OT, I suggest you consider the following:

Isaiah 40:3-5 - John the Baptist was to prepare the way of Jehovah. He actually prepared the way for Jesus (Mark 1:1-3). Therefore, Jesus is Jehovah.

Is. 44:24; 42:5 - Jehovah is the Creator of all things, but Jesus is the Creator of all things (Col. 1:16; John 1:3). Therefore, Jesus is Jehovah.

Is. 43:11 - Jehovah is the ONLY Savior, but Jesus is the Savior ((Tit. 2:13). Therefore, Jesus is Jehovah.

Zechariah 11:11-13 - Jehovah was to be sold for 30 pieces of silver, but it was Jesus who was sold for 30 pieces of silver. Therefore, Jesus is Jehovah.

I could go on and on; there are dozens of places in the scripture where Jesus is identified as Jehovah, and the Watchtower has to scurry around trying to explain why the scriptures don't mean what they say in order to maintain its theological position. Are you sincere enough to read the Bible without the Watchtower blinders, and accept what it plainly says?

I strongly suggest you consider some of the study material recommended by Rex B13 in the prior thread from which this one spun off. To reiterate, he said:

If you really care, do the research and you will see that every little objection is handled here:
http://www.watchman.org/jw/answers.htm Answering Watchtower Objections
http://www.gospelcom.net/apologeticsindex/t03.html The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity by Robert Bowman
http://www.gospelcom.net/apologeticsindex/t10.html The Doctrine of the Trinity
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Trinity/beckwith.html The Trinity by Francis J Beckwith
http://www.probe.org/docs/bel-trin.html Why We Should Believe in the Trinity Pat Zuckeran
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/9t8/9t8072.html Writing the Trinity Philip Yancey
http://www.atlantaapologist.org/Sharp.html A Bicentennial Defense of Granville Sharp's Argument for the Deity of Christ.
If you aren't going to do the research then you end up posting something that is foolish to anyone who has actually studied the issue. Rev Bil is a blatant example of this, posting the same old arguments built on straw man and red herrings.

Rev Bill, I'd like to think you're better than that. Do the research, and be honest with yourself!

Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan