flamegrilled
JoinedPosts by flamegrilled
-
12
The lion king mufasa in today's WT?
by purrpurr inhas no one else seen this illustration in today's watchtower?
i don't know how to post it on here perhaps someone will help?.
i swear its straight out of the lion king, the scene were scar throws mufasa into the stampede "long live the king" that scene.. i wonder how many jw kids will be picking up on this today?
-
-
-
40
@ RC: "For evolution to be true..."
by Scully inaccording to a jw contact, one of the speakers at the regional conventiontm stated that "for evolution to be true, two of the same kind would have had to evolve at the same time; one would have to be male and the other would have to be female, and then they would have to find each other".
apparently the crowd had a good laugh over how evolutionists overlook such a simple "fact".. i mentioned that bacteria and viruses use asexual reproduction, and that many sea creatures / fish, etc.
are hermaphrodite and do not require a sexual partner to produce offspring.. oddly enough, the conversation stopped there.
-
-
flamegrilled
@Finkelstein
You can have ONE species that is both male and female at the same time. Over time the selection mechanism differentiates the sexual organs so that the future species now produces two sexually different versions of itself. Or six. Whatever works better for THAT organism in its particular environment.
I confess to not fully understanding the answer to the question myself. I have read a reasonable amount from both sides of the argument and can see plenty of compelling evidence for biological evolution.
But why do some species not have "six" genders as you seem to suggest this is just as reasonable a contender. Even when polymorphism occurs the morphs are still distinguishable as male/female as far as I understand it.
I'm not taking a position on the OP, although I understand the oversimplification that betrays some ignorance on the matter. But this is just a genuine question.
FG
-
52
Writing Department Interview on "The Generation."
by cappytan ina member of the writing department was gracious enough to allow me to interview him about the "overlapping generation" doctrine.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eo1o5qmagu.
-
-
flamegrilled
Truly priceless. Thank you. Please do the "Downfall" one if you can. -
-
-
flamegrilled
As long as the lions act in consecutive waves with each wave coming from a new generation, rather than a simultaneous army from the same generation, then the lions can easily win.
They merely need to attack in groups of 100, and wait for a full generation before the next attack.
The average lifespan of a lion is at least 10 years in the wild. Splitting into these generational waves of 100 lions will subject the sun to 500,000,000 attacks before it burns out in 5 billion years.
And there will still be 950,000,000,000 lions remaining to rule the universe (although they'll be a bit chilly unless they move on).
-
21
i work with a JW and he doesnt know im an inactive
by user100 inso i started working at this place 4 years ago.. and i am usually myself a still-in inactive atheist jw at work.
after several months i came to realize the guy i work with is a devout jw... im always afraid of running into him in the conventions.. he is in a different circuit but im afraid he might show up in one of the district conventions.. i am dreading that day...
-
-
flamegrilled
Oubliette,
No, it wasn't directed at you specifically. And some of what you say is true.
However since you bring it up I will comment on that 3rd point as I do hear it often on this site. i.e. "The elders only have as much power and authority over any of us as we give them." It is so situation dependent and I would say that it might be more true for some than others.
We all know that if you are a fading JW who has a family loyal to the religion then the elders DO have the power to sever your ties with them. This is not power that we give them. It may be power that your family gives them, but not you as an individual.
It's good that in your own experience things have rarely been as bad as you expected. But that doesn't mean that there are not certain situations which can be very bad indeed if circumstances transpire against you. Everybody's family situation is a little different so we can't say to any individual that everything will be fine if you ignore the problem.
In general I am not disagreeing that it doesn't help to worry unduly, but at the same time if I was in user100's situation again I would prefer to hear some practical advice on how to mitigate the risk, rather than be told not to worry about it.
All the best,
FG -
21
i work with a JW and he doesnt know im an inactive
by user100 inso i started working at this place 4 years ago.. and i am usually myself a still-in inactive atheist jw at work.
after several months i came to realize the guy i work with is a devout jw... im always afraid of running into him in the conventions.. he is in a different circuit but im afraid he might show up in one of the district conventions.. i am dreading that day...
-
-
flamegrilled
I very much understand your situation. It's easy for others to say "what does it matter?". But having been through an almost identical situation myself I can very much relate to your concerns.
Most people here understand the consequences of being "outed" as a JW not "playing by the rules", rather than fading, so I'm surprised they don't seem to understand the stress that this situation can cause.
If you know his specific congregation that might help. Does he serve as elder/MS? If so you can keep an eye on your public talk schedule to make sure you miss if he's your visiting speaker.
-
43
Jesus Saves From What? March 2015 Watchtower Article
by Perry ini just skimmed the titled article on jw.org and once again the watchtower is misdirecting:.
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/wp20150301/jesus-death-and-resurrection/ .
they try and make the old case that jesus saves us from being destroyed at armageddon.
-
-
flamegrilled
@Cofty
Perry - Your illustration of the young man who had committed a crime worthy of 22 years in jail is bullshit.
You approve of billions of good men, women and children being tortured for all eternity for simply being rational enough to reject your particular set of superstitions.
First of all your very first statement is not indicative of someone who has any room in their mind to reason on something. Both paragraphs are constructed in such a conceited way as to be self-condemning. I won't break it down, and this is not in support of whatever Perry believes about hell because I simply don't know. But if I'm not mistaken you considered yourself rational when you previously believed in what you now label as "superstitions".
Were you rational back then?
Note that I'm not asking if you were mistaken. I'm asking if you were rational. If not then what makes you think that you are rational now?
Your air of superiority is clearly built upon your conviction that you are rational, and that people like Perry and me are not. But it's a curious thing to self-examine and identify when one crosses the line from irrationality to rationality and back again - especially since it is largely based upon self-assessment, or endorsement from those who you choose to identify with. Your window for objective assessment is actually pretty small when you adopt the type of rhetoric that has become your signature style.
FG
-
68
Help needed: Written material regarding shunning of DF'd and DA'd individuals
by EdenOne ini would like this to become a permanent thread, because i think there are grounds - at least in europe - to take this matter up to the european court of human rights.
not sure we'll ever get there, but one must start somewhere.
objective: force, by legal means, the watchtower society and the jehovah's witnesses to stop the practice of shunning ex-jehovah's witnesses, on grounds that it constitutes a violation of human rights.. what is needed: all written material ever published by the watchtower society, especially since 1940's, concerning the practice of shunning.
-
-
flamegrilled
God speed to you EdenOne. I agree that the road would be difficult and many have tried before, but I also feel that no other long-standing tolerance of bad group/human/social behaviour changed overnight. They all had to start somewhere and gain momentum.
I have very limited knowledge of US or European law. Nevertheless if a case were to be presented I have a gut feel that it would hang on some other unrelated precedent that is already undergoing change. One that might be closely related is protection of individuals rights against bullying. This has thankfully received a lot of attention in recent times as social media has elevated the act of bullying beyond something that it used to be e.g. physical and verbal abuse in the privacy of a school play area. It seems to me that the law is recognizing the reach of “group-think” to result in a damaging act. And ultimately that is what is at stake here.
The problem is that nobody can force person A to talk to person B. That would be a violation of person A's rights. Therefore nobody can stop any individual from shunning someone else and try to bring the legal system to bear on it. I believe that is the reason that no claims against shunning policies by any religions will succeed in the ways that they have been previously presented.
Only if a serious libel suit can be established will the person win (e.g. Olin Moyle). But that is a libel issue and does not set any precedent for ruling against the shunning process itself.
If however a case could be built upon the idea that shunning is a form of bullying – not by those who actually shun – but by those who encourage it to happen against an individual on a group basis – I could see some different dynamics coming into play.
For example if a person posts something defamatory on Facebook which results in people who have no first hand knowledge of the facts treating the victim in such a way as to hurt them, then I reckon that there would be some grounds against the poster.
Why is JW DF'ing different? They argue that they have the right to expel from their membership, and this is true (and a huge hurdle). But if that expulsion is based upon the actions of the bully (the three men in the JC) and the remaining participants in the bullying (all other JWs) are only acting on hearsay, and it is damaging to the individual, then what is the difference between that and the FB bully?
It's just a thought process that has come to mind, and maybe others have tried to legally tread this path before. I don't know. But it's all I can contribute for now.
FG
-
22
WTBS Canada received almost $9 million from cong. donations in 2013
by Richard_I injust saw this on the ex-jw subreddit.
on opencharity.ca, you can view wtbs canada's financial info and in 2013 they received almost $9 million in donations.
you can even see how much some congregations gave.
-
-
flamegrilled
united way of greater Toronto gave the branch $14909 last year?
I would also love to know how this can be. I've heard United Way put down by so many people within the org - from CO's to elders to rank & file, either on the basis of supposed religious affiliation or just being a poor example of charity. How on earth did they get $15K from them???
-
27
This idea might not be new, but does a website like this exist?
by ILoveTTATT ini am deeply upset every time there's someone in the news who has died because of the stupid and immoral blood doctrine.. i would like to make a website documenting every single instance of a news report of someone dying from lack of a blood transfusion, and to keep track of it.
that would give some data on the real and current incidence of deaths due to the blood transfusion doctrine.. is there already a website like that?.
.
-
-
flamegrilled
I applaud the intention completely, but I fear that it can never have any real value.
The % of cases in which the lack of blood treatment is the fully proven cause of death would be close to zero I think.
The listings in the database would have to figure out how much of a part the policy played in the outcome. This would be so subjective if it included an honest representation of all the variables it would be hard to figure out the real impact of JW policy. I think that is the underlying problem that Shilmer, AJWRB and others have consistently faced in trying to represent the facts.
To be meaningful the database would also have to include ALL the outcomes for refusals of treatment - even the positive ones - and I think this data would be impossible to gather. If you disagree with this last statement then bear in mind that if you take the risk to reject any form of blood then there may be an increased chance of reduced complications if you survive. I think this is generally accepted.
Don't get me wrong. I am firmly against the JW blood policy being enforced on its members and I really wish the impact were measurable in some significant way. But it is simply not like that.
This is what allows the GB to keep maintaining the pressure under the radar. If the impact was truly known then it would be much harder for them to hide their convoluted policies.
If someone could show me where I am wrong I would consider donating time to research this and contributing to the project.
FG