Stafford is just the flip side of the Pharisee coin. Reminds me of the battle between Athanasius and Arius. Whowever gets on top will surely burn the "bad men" at the stake. Stafford and the Watchtower are both wrong be cause the source of their authority - The Bible - is mostly myth.
proplog2
JoinedPosts by proplog2
-
27
Comment by Greg Stafford to a Question
by Gordy inthe following is a comment from greg stafford.
if anyone has already posted this i apologise.
did do a search but couldn't find it.. http://www.elihubooks.com/lampstand/watchtower.htm.
-
-
-
5
Redefinition of "Spiritual"
by proplog2 init's ok for modern thinkers to use archaic terms if we can show the term has use in our contemporary scientific world.. science tries to explain the behavior of "things" (including animals).
the latin word "anima" means spirit or breath.
ancient man was also scientific in orientation.
-
-
proplog2
Spiritual is whatever nourishes the spirit.
I want to avoid tautologies like that.
Information (Spiritual) is what adds to (nourishes) your knowledge (Spirit)
-
5
Redefinition of "Spiritual"
by proplog2 init's ok for modern thinkers to use archaic terms if we can show the term has use in our contemporary scientific world.. science tries to explain the behavior of "things" (including animals).
the latin word "anima" means spirit or breath.
ancient man was also scientific in orientation.
-
-
proplog2
It's OK for modern thinkers to use archaic terms if we can show the term has use in our contemporary scientific world.
Science tries to explain the behavior of "things" (including animals). The latin word "anima" means spirit or breath. Ancient man was also scientific in orientation. Ancient man just didn't have enough "information". So he imagined some invisible force (breathlike, windlike) that moved or "animated" things. Another name for this type of belief is "animism". Modern religion tends to look down on this belief as being childish. Disney has made a fortune on the idea that tea pots, clocks and rocks can be brought to life.
The concept of "spirtuality" emerges from this background and it becomes the stew-pot for all the invisible stuff behind and in the "material" stuff. Because of this we have the dichotomy Spiritual-Material
To the modern thinker there IS something very important that isn't "material". INFORMATION.
Happy is the man conscious of his need for INFORMATION. Just as ancient man saw that there is more than meets the "eye" modern man seeks to accumulate knowledge and information NOT just "material".
Modern thinkers also have something similar to FAITH. They have induction.
Wikipedia defines induction: " Induction or inductive reasoning, sometimes called inductive logic, is the process of reasoning in which the conclusion of an argument is very likely to be true, but not certain, given the premises. It is to ascribe properties or relations to types based on limited observations of particular tokens; or to formulate laws based on limited observations of recurring phenomenal patterns."
Which is more likely? Redfining "spiritual" as "information" or abandoning the term "spiritual" altogether?
-
3
Anti-Aging Pill Initial Tests Good!
by metatron inhttp://www.technologyreview.com/blog/duncan/17658/.
this is excellent news!.
metatron.
-
-
proplog2
Possible good news for all of us "life" junkies.
My supply of "life" is running out fast.
-
43
WT KINGDOM FARM SOLD $$$$$
by DannyHaszard inhttp://www.lansingstar.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2454&itemid=66.
.
.
-
-
proplog2
Maybe they are maintaining liquidity while land in the USA is still worth something. They seem to have written off New York City and they anticipate some kind of world catastrophe and figure they will need Euros, Rubles,Yen or even Gold or whatever becomes the stable currency.
Selling off USA assets seems to be a wise move if you believe something is going to turn bad.
Does anyone know if they are selling their properties overseas?
-
56
Birthdays—Simple Deconstruction of the JW Rationale
by AuldSoul into deconstruct the jw rationale surrounding birthdays, a few simple guidelines should be followed.. (1): don't waste any energy trying to convince a jw that birthdays are not pagan, if they suggest that, readily agree.
whether or not the celebrations are pagan turns out to be a non-issue that distracts from the main point.. (2): stay focused on the fact that jws disfellowship people for celebrating birthdays.. (3): stress the point that there should always be clear scriptural reason for disfellowshipping someone.
ask them often throughout the discussion whether this is the case, get them to reinforce this need to themselves.. (4): remember, the first goal is deconstructing their rationale, not giving them a new rationale, not convincing them that celebrating birthdays is a good thing.. once you have these well in mind, the deconstruction can begin.. jw rationale, in brief:.
-
-
proplog2
CELEBRATING BIRTHDAYS.
JW= of course JW WP = Worldly Person.
WP. Would you care to have some birthday cake? JW. No, I don't celebrate birthdays?
WP. Why is that? JW. I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses and we don't celebrate
birthdays because it's a pagan practice condemned by the Bible.
WP. I didn't know the Bible actually condemned birth day parties.
Would you care to give me the scripture where it says you shouldn't
celebrate birthdays? Does it specifically say "Thou shalt not
celebrate birthdays?" JW. Well, it doesn't specifically say "you should not celebrate
birthdays" However, in the two instances where a birthday is
mentioned in the Bible it is celebrated by a pagan and there were
murders associated with the celebration. We feel that this is an
indication of how Jehovah wants us to view birthdays.
WP. Since there is no specific law that says birthdays are
forbidden this is very weak evidence for your strong condemnation.
Do you see that? JW. That's your opinion! We don't consider it weak evidence.
WP. Do you understand the concept of Strong versus Weak evidence? JW. What do YOU mean by strong versus Weak evidence?
WP. If the Bible said "Thou shalt not celebrate birthdays" and
this command was stated by Jesus that would be pretty strong
evidence that NO one could deny right? JW. True
WP. Would you say that because Jews didn't do certain things that
this is STRONG evidence that Christians are obligated to imitate
the Jews on a particular matter? JW. Yes. At least in the case of Birthdays.
WP. Did Jewish men shave their beards? JW. No.
WP. Did you know shaving of the beard was a pagan ritual? Shaving
is taken for granted today because our technology has given us
sharp razors and great foamy stuff to remove our facial hair. Back
then the only people who shaved were those who were required to do
so as part of worship of a false God. If we were to use your
formula for determining STRONG evidence then the evidence is just
as STRONG for not carrying on the pagan practice of shaving your
beard off. So why don't you avoid this pagan practice? JW. Shaving has been incorporated into our culture? And no one
makes the connection to its pagan origins.
WP. So then are you saying that if something isn't directly
condemned by the Bible and if it is not associated by ones culture
to its pagan origins then it is transformed into an acceptable
practice? JW. Yes. But birthdays are still pagan!
WP. What percentage of people in Western culture who celebrate
their birthday is thinking about its pagan origins? 95% 75% 50%
JW. I don't know
WP. Would you think most do or maybe just a few Satan Worshiper
types who are trying to insert pagan rituals into everything they
do? The point I am trying to make is that Since there isn't a
command in the Bible that says you shouldn't celebrate birthdays
then you MUST HAVE a "general rule" that you feel is applicable to
Birthdays. If you have a general rule that says "If a practice has
a pagan origin it is wrong for a Christian to carry on such a
practice" then you ought to follow this rule without exception in
all things that might have a pagan origin including little pagan
things like wedding rings, and shaving. JW. We don't go to extremes. We're not Mennonites.
WP. Exactly but who decides where to draw the line? Shouldn't it
be a matter of conscience. It is precisely this kind of thing
which isn't specifically forbidden by the Bible that should be
decided by the individual and not an organizational rule. JW. Well we consider it a protection. By not celebrating birthdays
we avoid worldly contact.
WP. Do you celebrate anniversaries? JW. Yes.
WP. So do non JW's. Do you go to anniversaries of non-JW's who are
close friends or relatives? JW. That would be a conscience matter.
WP. Then couldn't the contact with NON-JW's be a matter of choice
with birthdays also? I mean can you really say that avoiding Non-
JW's is a valid reason for not celebrating birthdays when you have
a choice of attending an anniversary of a NON-JW? JW. Another reason we don't celebrate birthdays is because the
Early Christians didn't do it.
WP. Does it say somewhere in the Bible that Christians didn't
celebrate birthdays? JW. No but there are writings from the first Century that indicate
Christians thought it was wrong to celebrate birthdays.
WP. Are you adding those writings to the Bible as sacred and
inspired? Where do you draw the line on what you consider sacred
and inspired writings? Wouldn't evidence from the Ante-Nicene
Fathers be considered weak? I am sure you could find practices of
Christians from this period that you WOULDN'T recommend. JW. Nobody is telling you that you shouldn't celebrate birthdays.
If we decide as a group that it is wrong that's our business. If
you don't agree with it then just stay with your pagan religion.
WP. The one thing I want to make clear is that if an individual
decides in his conscience that birthdays are wrong that is HIS
business. But that person should not condemn others in-as-much as
the evidence is indirect and therefore WEAK. Creating a division
between people by using WEAK evidence is sectarian and such an
organization cannot recommend itself over all the other religions
that maintain their identity with minor issues based on weak
evidence. Read the entire 14th Chapter of Romans where we are told
in vs 4 "Who are you to judge the house servant of another? To his
own master he stands or falls...(5) One man judges one day as above
another; another man judges one day as all others; let each man be
fully convinced in his OWN mind." (10) But why do you judge your
brother? Or why do you also look down on your brother?...(12)So,
then each of us will render an account for himself to God...(22)
The faith that you have, HAVE IT IN ACCORD WITH YOURSELF in the
sight of God. Happy is the man that does not put HIMSELF on
judgement by what HE approves." -
5
Why the Universe Is Weirder Than You May Think
by metatron ini enjoy reading and listening to john stossel, of "20/20" fame.
i appreciate his skeptical and libertarian.
outlook.
-
-
proplog2
Metatron: Better you than me! I am so glad you keep taking up the subject of UFO's. It's only a matter of time before we find out what technology these entities have. More importantly we will learn their philosophy.
-
125
?Please explain Evolution to me in simple terms
by Guest with Questions inand please dont give me links to read.
i dont want a complicated version; just a very simple explanation on the theory of evolution, and if possible, in your own words.
many of us are very ignorant on this subject and it seems that a few here are very knowledgeable so i hope you can help me and others also.. also if you believe in the theory of common descent, could you explain that to me also?
-
-
proplog2
X = 1 TO INFINITY
do A
If ooops then A=A+ooops
Next -
26
Harry Potter and the exasperated mum........help
by fifi40 inmy ex is a jw (as previously mentioned) and is against our son going to see the new movie, despite admitting that he has witness friends who will happily go and see it........oh and he also has witness friends that would dob their brother into the elders for going to see it.. i have just had a bit of a heated debate about it with him (our son is 14, nearly 15) and i just wondered if any of you have good sound reasoning for what is a 'matter of conscience' for these brainwashedd poo brains!!!!!.
help.........warlock can you just wave a magic wand or something............ a mother doing battle with the force...............a brain numbing, mind control force at that.
seriously folks though any gems you have would be greatly appreciated.
-
-
proplog2
Just saw the movie "Jesus Camp". Evangelicals condemn watching and reading Harry Potter. They claim Harry Potter would have been stoned if he lived in ancient Israel. Witnesses are in good company!
-
77
Was the 9/11 Collaspe of the WTC Caused by Controlled Demolition?
by frankiespeakin inthis is video is of high quality and well done and has over 2 million views which is bound to have a very big impact on public opinion,, thank god for the internet:.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=9%2f11+mysteries&total=633&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0.
-
-
proplog2
A conspiracy of that magnitude could never be carried out by fallible human beings. Hundreds (thousands?) of explosive charges planted with a guarantee that they would all explode is way too risky for any government agency. If only one dud were found in the wreckage you would have a case. But none? They show pictures of the kind of cut these explosives would typically make in a metal beam. So, what percentage of fractures show that they could have only been done by demolition. Is it likely that with so much destruction you would find examples that "look like" demolition style damage? Sure. But you would have to photograph every foot of damage in the heap and do a correlation matrix to see if there is sufficient numbers of this type of damage to suggest strong, moderate, weak or zero evidence of demolition. I saw this movie with it's experts pontificating and the soft hypnotizing female narrator in the background interspersed with emotion generating pictures of buildings collapsing, people running ahead of the impact cloud and the people jumping out of the building. Pure propaganda piece.