Perry

Joined

• started 287 topics
• posted 5,495 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Perry

• 
  15

  How many wrongs make a right?

  by eyeuse2badub in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  came across this little gem while my wife was "digging for bible gems" in her weekly meeting preparation.

  nothing new but i gently pointed it out to her as a reminder that bible reading can be hazardous to your mental health!.

  do 2 (or 3, or 4) wrongs, make a right?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  David get called out in front of all Israel, he gets to see his wives get raped in ‘broad daylight’

  Here is a little more research on the incident in historical context.
• 
  10

  New Thoughts on Human Origins.

  by fulltimestudent in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this article appeared originally in new scientist (july 4, 2018) under the heading:.

  "asia’s mysterious role in the early origins of humanity".

  bizarre fossils from china are revealing our species' asian origins and rewriting the story of human evolution".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  Evolutionary paleoanthropologist Milford Wolpoff wrote, ‘In my view, “objectivity” does not exist in science. Even in the act of gathering data, decisions about what data to record and what to ignore reflect the framework of the scientist.’

  Evolutionists John Gribbin and Jeremy Cherfas acknowledge, ‘…we do know that the popular image of the scientist as a dispassionate seeker after the truth could not be further from reality.’

  Half Bananna,

  Everyone has a starting point. That starting point sifts data accordingly as the two evolutionists above admit, to their credit.

  After I left the .org I spent a few years researching various topics, including evolution. And, I just didn't see the evidence stack up enough. I spot check my position now and then and I still come up with the same skepticism on evolution, only usually stronger. I still have one or two questions that don't seem to fit. But by far there are more problems with the standard Materialist paradigm than with ID in my opinion.

  If 99% of what makes up a specimen is missing already when we examine just the bones; And, if those bones are not indistinguishable from at least some modern humans ....? Where's the beef?

  Apes, many of which have already gone extinct, admittedly have a structure similar to that of humans. But this could just as easily point to a common Designer and not a common ancestor, depending on the "framework" of the researcher. And, with 99% of the specimen missing, I just don't see the justification for all the ape to men characterizations.

  New discoveries are being made at an amazing pace, the majority of which do not fit the standard evolutionary model from what I've seen. The last link I posted above lists thousands of findings, that if any one of them are true, destroys the standard evolutionary tale.
  
  This is a list of 3000 Phd scientists who are skeptical of darwinian evolution.

  Here's another unrelated list., available for download.

  And, I do understand how disturbing this information is to some who have already been deceived at great personal cost by the Watchtower.
• 
  10

  New Thoughts on Human Origins.

  by fulltimestudent in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this article appeared originally in new scientist (july 4, 2018) under the heading:.

  "asia’s mysterious role in the early origins of humanity".

  bizarre fossils from china are revealing our species' asian origins and rewriting the story of human evolution".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  FTS,

  What is your opinion of these scientific findings?
• 
  44

  How do you deal with the smoke?

  by compound complex in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i hope you're not dealing with wildfires in your area.

  currently, california is under siege.

  we, in the sierra nevada foothills, had our major conflagration last october and needed to evacuate.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  I deal with hurricanes, hail storms and small house fires in my restoration business. I have never experienced anything like you all are experiencing right now out in Cali.
  
  Be safe and don't take chances!
• 
  25

  Am I being unreasonable with my pimo boyfriend?

  by Addison0998 in

  1. social
  2. relationships

  i was very lucky to have be dating somebody who didn’t run and snitch on me when i started having questions and showing him research i did, instead he listened to me, and after a few arguements, he did wake up as well.

  it really didn’t take much to wake him up, and he was more just tired of the crazy witnesses in general.

  and now we are planning on getting married and fading together so that our families can at least enjoy our wedding, that special time in life, before we possibly loose them one day.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  There are 4 basic types of personalities. Everyone has a dominant and a lesser one. And small amounts of the other two usually.
  
  Please take the time to learn about each and how each achieves goals and reacts to various things. Only then will you know how to understand yourself and others. You will know if someone (or yourself) is reacting according to the way the personality type perceives things or if it is indeed some sort of maladaptive reaction, or lack therof.
  
  I highly recommend taking a weekend seminar from danijohnson.com
  
  I have been to a least a half dozen. Simply invaluable.
• 
  10

  New Thoughts on Human Origins.

  by fulltimestudent in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this article appeared originally in new scientist (july 4, 2018) under the heading:.

  "asia’s mysterious role in the early origins of humanity".

  bizarre fossils from china are revealing our species' asian origins and rewriting the story of human evolution".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  A century on from Peking Man, the discovery of fossils in China and beyond over the last decade has given palaeoanthropologists pause for thought, suggesting that, maybe, Africa was not the only ‘human cradle’"

  Wasn't Peking Man reclassified as homo erectus?

  And haven't homo erectus remains been found all around the world? Found in the same strata and close proximity to homo sapiens? With the same inner ear structure as modern humans? With a brain capacity within the modern range of variance in humans? With limbs indistinguishable from "modern" humans?

  
  

  Evolutionists believe erectus to be sub-human based on certain features of the skull like the large brow ridges. But this is not evidence at all, because humans today have essentially all of these features.[1]

  
  The cranial (i.e. brain) capacity is within the human range;[2] there is good evidence that erectus used tools; had controlled use of fire; they buried their dead; they used red ochre for decoration; had seafaring skills;[3] and their posture was just like ours.[4]
  

  
  Based on the above evidence, many prominent scientists have classified Homo erectus as Homo sapiens(modern man) because ‘no single definition has been found that distinguishes H. sapiens from H. erectus in all regions where the fossils are found’ and ‘there is no distinct beginning for H. sapiens as long as H. erectus is recognized.’[5]
• 
  14

  So I went to see my dad give a talk

  by StephaneLaliberte in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i have to say that it was quite a strange feeling.

  for many years that i was in, i had to do a lot of pretending with various teachings i personally didn’t believe in.

  still, i believed in some foundation and went for that.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  Most of the OT is basically cliff notes. But there are enough other sources to flesh out the larger picture.
• 
  14

  So I went to see my dad give a talk

  by StephaneLaliberte in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i have to say that it was quite a strange feeling.

  for many years that i was in, i had to do a lot of pretending with various teachings i personally didn’t believe in.

  still, i believed in some foundation and went for that.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  And now I am curious as to why it was wise or just of God to order the massacre of every in Canaan.

  The link above may provide more food for thought.

  I have my own short-answer sound bite, but the above link is a pretty thorough treatment of the subject.
  
  
• 
  14

  So I went to see my dad give a talk

  by StephaneLaliberte in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i have to say that it was quite a strange feeling.

  for many years that i was in, i had to do a lot of pretending with various teachings i personally didn’t believe in.

  still, i believed in some foundation and went for that.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  For instance, he was saying that you can be friends with Jehovah and get to know him like Abraham did.

  I have run into this argument before. The reason the Watchtower teaches people to use this line (it is common) is because the WT tries to make the argument that we can be friends with God OUTSIDE of the New Covenant.
  
  Abraham was friends with God for one reason only...because he believed him, period. Had Abraham lived in the New Testament period, he would have believed God the same as he did before and accepted Christ as his Mediator. Abraham would not go along with a teaching opposite of what God has said: "There is one Mediator between God and men, a man Christ Jesus".

  They are trying to create an extra-biblical position that claims you can be God's Friend even though Jesus isn't your Mediator from judgment, which occurs after you die. (Hebrews 9:27)

  So the Watchtower reasoning is actually an impossibility: Essentially claiming that; If you disbelieve God and believe us instead, you can be God's friend like Abraham was because he believed God.
  
  Here's some additional information on the account of the bears as well.
• 
  4

  Changing name on organization

  by asp59 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  when people hear the name jehovah instead of thinking about god, they think about a religion or organization.

  with all the problems with child abuse and the downhill motion the organization been having.

  do you think they change name of organization?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Perry

  Witnesses for Jesus is already taken.
  
  But since Joseph Rutherford came up with the name, I'm thinking Joe's Witnesses might be more appropriate. And if you say Joe's Witnesses real fast, it almost sounds the same. Just a thought.