Posts by proplog2

i have also heard mention of 'early christian' practice spoken of to defend the blood issue.. so what makes the '1st century christians' actually christians, and not largely represented by fundamentalist nuts too ?

so now many antichrists have comei'd say there were just as many (by proportion) standover fearful religious nuts full of literal rules, back when some people first literally didn't eat blood, or literally get circumcised etc.. .

proplog2

A Paduan:

I agree with you and I think Narkissos does too. Just a little confusion. You are basically saying that there is NO definitive Christian. Jesus didn't write anything. He simply lived a certain kind of life.

41

"Jehovah Has Become King", video by Robert King

by frankiespeakin in

jw
friends

is he trying to start his own mind control cult?

watch the video and judge.. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5267956386083735501&q=jehovah&hl=en.

proplog2

He is giving in to the prophetic seduction. It's OK to make predictions as long as you realize YOU are making the predictions. When you think God is working through you - you have been seduced. The Watchtower has this problem - primarily via Fred Franz's influence.

This is how it works:

We are the special people of God.

I (Freddy) have the duty of writing articles and interpreting prophecy.

Therefore I (Freddy) am God's special spokesman.

Anything that arouses My (Freddy) curiosity is a special area that God wants Me (Freddy) to attend to.

Any conclusions I (Freddy) reach through My (Freddy) investigation and that is subsequently printed in the Watchtower is food in due season.

That's how a pedantic obssessive compulsive pharisee came up with weird chronologies, convoluted blood transfusion policies, rigid attitudes toward alternative service, 1975, disfelowshipping smokers, stoning young people with their "dirty" adolescent sexual desires.

King is more entrepreneurial than Franz. Franz, like a virus, hijacked a completely formed organization. King is capable of Russell-like formation of his OWN organization.

It's too bad Rutheford died when he did. He seemed to at least enjoy a good bottle of hooch and a salty joke or two.

36

What do you think the biggest danger to the end of mankind or earth is?

by free2beme in

jw
friends

i love watching shows on the history channel, discovery channel and so on.

they had this program on the other day, on the ten biggest threats to mankind and the planet earth.

surprisingly, none of the items on the list were god destroying mankind or the earth, so that must be further evidence that the witnesses were wrong, go to college now and retire.

proplog2

As Paul Erlich said:

"A slow moving glacier of warm meat"

In other words overpopulation.

19

The.....2nd Coming....of Jesus.....WHEN?

by Terry in

concerning the 2nd coming of christ i'll say this.. nobody understood the first coming.

what makes you think those people knew anything at all about a 2nd coming?

if any part of the bible messege wasn't garbled it's clear the apostles and 1st century christians who should have/might have been privvy to information of this nature didn't know squat!

proplog2

Star:

That's easy I'm deranged. Or many MAY think so.

I believe you can believe any combination of things you want. The key to creativity is being able to blend dichotomies.

Parts of the Bible like Daniel and Revelation refer to some kind of supernatural entities (angels) giving them information. So I can believe that some - NOT all - of the Bible is worthy of consideration. Not necessarily belief but thoughtful observation. It is a kind of hypothetical view of the Bible. You perform an experiment on it.

Most people simply choose to dismiss the Bible out right. A lot of people - especially highly intelligent and scholarly people - are not very creative. They are bound by rigid thinking. They are self definsive and also have great respect for boundaries. They are afraid or unable to come up with their own ideas so they rely on others to do the explaining. When they discover the hole in their belief they don't make a real effort to integrate the new information - they just hit the brick wall and change directions.

I probably am an atheist. But I call myself an agnostic because it avoids the trap of "certainty".

The Bible can be viewed in many contexts.

I would challenge anyone to come up with a better explanation of Revelation using significant historical events.

Some say Revelation is already fullfilled. This is a logical supposition. But it still leaves a lot of string dangling with absolutely NO possibility of resolution. After all, if it is all fullfilled and if there are some things that didn't happen then you will NEVER know. So forget about it. It is the answer for those who are NOT creative.

I take the significant patterns of Revelation and look for current matches and see if there is a trend line emerging. That's all. My interpretation leaves strings dangling too, BUT with this difference - I hold onto the possibility that those strings will be resolved in the future and keep watching. Or as Jesus said "Keep on the watch" .

It might be that I too will reach a point where I conclude that Revelation is nonsense. But not yet. For me there is just too much going on that is beyond mere coincidence.

29

e-jehovahs-witnesses & e-watchman

by rassillon in

jw
friends

is there anyone here that used to or currently posts there?.

i did over a year ago, right before robert came out of the closet and went nutsoid.. he weirds me out.

and the other people are like sheeple.. i am so glad i found this place.. can we say delusions of grandure.

proplog2

When I get time - one of the things on my list is to shred watchmans claims. He makes serious errors.

19

The.....2nd Coming....of Jesus.....WHEN?

by Terry in

concerning the 2nd coming of christ i'll say this.. nobody understood the first coming.

what makes you think those people knew anything at all about a 2nd coming?

if any part of the bible messege wasn't garbled it's clear the apostles and 1st century christians who should have/might have been privvy to information of this nature didn't know squat!

proplog2

Wow. That's the worst free association bullshit I think I've ever written.

19

The.....2nd Coming....of Jesus.....WHEN?

by Terry in

concerning the 2nd coming of christ i'll say this.. nobody understood the first coming.

what makes you think those people knew anything at all about a 2nd coming?

if any part of the bible messege wasn't garbled it's clear the apostles and 1st century christians who should have/might have been privvy to information of this nature didn't know squat!

proplog2

Terry:

I continue to search to see if there is anything of value in the Bible. From the start I need to make it clear that I’m not doing this as an apologist I’m doing this as a person who has spent a lifetime assimilating Bible interpretations of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Along with this is the experience of disappointment from putting too much confidence in what a body of men claiming godly authority have decided.

At this point in time I am basically agnostic. I believe in evolution. I believe the Bible can be discredited as being the work of someone who created everything in the universe, understands everything , knows all, and if it is a work of such an entity it is not reflected in the many narratives and accounts in the Bible.

But at the same time I want to avoid the mistake of certainty. A lot of people out of frustration and disappointment find it so easy to throw the whole thing out, and consider the Bible as a total waste of time. If you’re going to do that you are buying into the idea that either it is ALL true or NONE of it is true. It’s either useful in all of its pages or its useless or of minimal use as any kind of moral guide or history. The main idea of religion, from my perspective is a system of salvation or survival. Religion has always claimed there is some greater reward for doing good and that there is survival in knowing the sacred communications. So it is in the spirit of looking for something in the book or collection of books we call the Bible, that in some way leads to a salvation of some sort.

The Bible doesn’t have a consistent moral theme. There are various chapters that appear to be immoral and highlight the inconsistencies of the people. Lot and his wife , Judah with Tamar, various acts of polygamy, having sexual relations with one’s maid servant. The abuse of people they conquered. Enslaving and having sex against the will of the women that were captured. A lot of apologists will say there was a moderating effect of certain rules but we’re not just talking about people who ought to stand out amongst their contemporaries - they should be exemplary, And if God is indeed shaping the culture and has the power to punish and the power to read hearts he should have been able to effect a much better situation.

So there is no need to go to the Bible. The Bible is not defensibile or useful as a moral guide any more than the common sense - you’re going to get in trouble with someone if you take someone’s wife/property, stealing is wrong, lying is wrong murder is wrong. There is nothing unique in these conclusions. All of the religious books and tribal elders on earth have reached very similar conclusions. So morality is not a unique or special benefit from reading and believing in the Bible.

The history is not completely trustworthy because it is not verifiable. Places, general time periods, may be established but whether the Red Sea actually parted or whether Moses was able to bring water out of a rock or any of these other things - who can say. There is no way of verifying these events unless you assume to begin with what you are trying to prove namely that the Bible is God’s Word. This is no different from the Moslems and the Koran the Hindu’s and their Vedas. If you want to believe in miracles there are a lot of miracles that you can believe in.

I want to proceed with the idea that the Watchtower is wrong for all the right reasons.

Once you separate the Bible from the concept of an Almighty God you do away with all those other "Why didn’t he do it this way" issues. Why wasn’t he more explicit if he’s all powerful. All these questions that are dependent on the notion of a supreme being create insurmountable difficulties in trying to accept anything in the context of the Bible.

Of course then if you don’t accept that these words were authored by a supreme being – GOD – then you still have to come up with an explanation other than God. I don’ believe that would be too hard. If something is not from a human/earthly source and its not from some imaginary construct such as a deity then you are left with everything else that might exist in the universe. And then if you raise the same questions at that point you’re off the hook. You don’t have to stand there with your mouth hanging open when someone asks why didn’t these aliens extraterrestrial aliens do it another way? The point is either they didn’t choose to do it another way or this is this is the most expedient way and therefore they couldn’t do it any other way. It keeps all of those questions from being raised. Perhaps it doesn’t keep them from being raised but it allows you to address them and reach a certain point where you can proceed even though you don’t have the answers.

14

Has anyone stuck with it despite all of this?

by Cass in

hi all, i know this must have already been discussed, but i'm just wondering if there is anyone here who has just kept going to meetings and the rest of it, just so that they don't lose their family?

thanks in anticipation of a response

proplog2

I am going to ride the ship into the rocks. There is room in my cosmology for a book like the Bible and a group that survive a great future catastrophe.

And if nothing happens I want to be around to comfort my fellow self-delusioned souls.