what question would you ask geoffrey jackson, as a member of the governing body of jehovah's witnesses, to answer?
.
jw leaks.
Why do you elevate the interests of the organization above the interests of the suffering innocent individual?
(At this point demonstrate the reams of information and testimony that prove it to be so)
Did Jesus ever do that? Could you show us where?
(At this point hand him the silver sword)
http://www.jw-archive.org/post/125844213823/geoffrey-jackson-declines-to-appear-before#at_pco=cfd-1.0&at_ab=per-15&at_pos=0&at_tot=14&at_si=55c27690475c6bb3
i have been following the events taken place in australia and i cannot help but notice that the jw's are feeding them a bunch of bull.
it reminds me of the faq on jw.org.
we all know there is a very different internal view/teaching than the jw.org faq would lead you to believe.
I have emailed them from personal experience some specific information on published rules vs practical application.
according 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.
I'm ordering "Power, Sex and Suicide" from Amazon. Thanks. There is much here that I know nothing about.
I note that the write up on Amazon cites Steve Jones as one of his scientific forebears. I find Jones extremely informative, but sometimes frustrating in that he sometimes makes some unsubstantiated assertions outside of his field of expertise.
The Lane book looks good though and I will give it a read.
according 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.
@Cofty
Flamegrilled - What is the fundamental difference between male and female?
Men are from Mars and Women from Venus ?? I don't know.
I read what you subsequently wrote, and don't discount it. Do you have a good source for researching this in a bit more depth? I'd really like to understand it better.
As far as some fungi having 36,000 sexes that is fascinating. But what does it mean in practice? I'm guessing that in the case of such a fungus then the chance of any two chosen at random being able to reproduce would essentially be 35999/36000. Is that basically how it would work?
has 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?
according 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.
@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
a 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.
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).
so 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...
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
