the feb. 15, 2003 wt.
has an article entitled, life in a refugee camp.
the whole article praises the unhcr, which is the united nations high commissioner of refugees.
I suspect that the current Praise of the UN is an attempt to minimize the past 10 years of disseminating UN propaganda. They can now say that the past 10 years of praise had nothing to do with the requirement to disseminate UN info. This is simply an attempt to blur the line between literature produced during the association and that produced after their association.
pseudo
the following was written by professor johseph d. wilson, d. d., and is about the prophecies and criticism of the book of daniel.
it was published in the four volume book series called "the fundamentals.".
modern objections to the book of daniel were started by german scholars who were prejudiced against the supernatural.
Seedy,
Your claim that Daniel is bogus goes unsupported. This article refutes many of the false claims against it.
Face it, Daniel was extremely accurate in his predictions and thats the only reason why you don't believe it.
The suggestion that "Daniel was extremely accurate in his predictions" is somewhat misleading. A more honest approach would suggest that writer of Daniel was extremely accurate in his writings concerning the period around 167-164BCE. His writings concerning the centuries prior to the second century BCE are less and less accurate. This is what has lead scholars to believe that it was written during the second century. If it was written in the second century, the author would have been more familiar with the current history and would of course recorded it more accurately then the history of the past centuries.
The writer's suggestion that new books would be opened in the last days, helped Daniel to quickly gain acceptance in a period of time when the Jews truly believed that they were in the last days. The second century BCE saw the development of many apocalyptic works very much like the book of Daniel. The simple explanation suggests that Daniel was indeed compiled in this time period.
pseudo
a load of crap from a jw forum.
i thought everyone would gag enjoy.. .
i have recently written a short essay on the mode and operation .
Hey, I found a BS generator. This essay actually makes more sense.
http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern/
My reply on the JW forum.
XXXX,
I think that Pickett observed this same phenomena in his
essay, "Constructivist narrative in the works of Fellini". Here is a
brief excerpt from it.
Sincerely,
xxxxxxx
Constructivist narrative in the works of Fellini
N. Rudolf Pickett
Department of Future Studies, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
1. Fellini and neosemantic discourse
If one examines the cultural paradigm of consensus, one is faced with
a choice: either accept constructivist narrative or conclude that
class, surprisingly, has intrinsic meaning, but only if the cultural
paradigm of consensus is invalid; otherwise, we can assume that
context is created by the collective unconscious. The premise of
Debordist image suggests that government is capable of significant
form.
But a number of dematerialisms concerning the role of the observer as
poet exist. The primary theme of Dietrich's[1] analysis of
presemanticist theory is the difference between sexual identity and
sexuality.
Therefore, Scuglia[2] states that the works of Fellini are
postmodern. The characteristic theme of the works of Fellini is the
dialectic, and eventually the rubicon, of subtextual class. Thus, an
abundance of sublimations concerning Debordist image may be
discovered. Baudrillard's critique of constructivist narrative holds
that the significance of the observer is social comment.
2. Narratives of futility
"Society is part of the defining characteristic of consciousness,"
says Lacan. But the main theme of McElwaine's[3] model of the
cultural paradigm of consensus is the bridge between class and art.
If Debordist image holds, we have to choose between dialectic
narrative and the neosemioticist paradigm of reality.
In the works of Fellini, a predominant concept is the concept of
dialectic sexuality. Thus, any number of theories concerning not, in
fact, materialism, but submaterialism exist. Bataille promotes the
use of the cultural paradigm of consensus to deconstruct society.
The characteristic theme of the works of Fellini is the
meaninglessness, and subsequent absurdity, of neosemanticist sexual
identity. In a sense, the primary theme of Dietrich's[4] critique of
constructivist narrative is not theory, but pretheory. Many
sublimations concerning the textual paradigm of context may be
revealed.
"Art is impossible," says Lacan. But the subject is contextualised
into a cultural paradigm of consensus that includes language as a
whole. The premise of constructivist narrative implies that
narrativity is part of the dialectic of sexuality, but only if
culture is equal to consciousness.
If one examines Debordist image, one is faced with a choice: either
reject neoconstructive narrative or conclude that discourse is a
product of the masses. Thus, the main theme of the works of Fellini
is a self-referential reality. In Amarcord, Fellini affirms Debordist
image; in La Dolce Vita he analyses the cultural paradigm of
consensus.
"Sexual identity is unattainable," says Bataille. However, Sontag
suggests the use of constructivist narrative to challenge class
divisions. The characteristic theme of Wilson's[5] analysis of the
cultural paradigm of consensus is the difference between society and
sexual identity.
If one examines Debordist image, one is faced with a choice: either
accept the cultural paradigm of consensus or conclude that
narrativity is used to reinforce the status quo, given that
constructivist narrative is valid. Thus, Marx promotes the use of
subcultural Marxism to read and deconstruct class. The main theme of
the works of Fellini is a patriarchialist whole.
In the works of Fellini, a predominant concept is the distinction
between destruction and creation. It could be said that Lacan
suggests the use of constructivist narrative to attack class
divisions. Lyotard uses the term 'the cultural paradigm of consensus'
to denote the role of the artist as participant.
But the characteristic theme of Scuglia's[6] model of constructivist
narrative is the defining characteristic, and hence the absurdity, of
neosemiotic culture. Foucault promotes the use of the cultural
paradigm of consensus to modify class.
It could be said that the subject is interpolated into a
constructivist narrative that includes consciousness as a totality.
Von Ludwig[7] holds that we have to choose between Debordist image
and patriarchialist narrative.
But an abundance of discourses concerning the bridge between class
and society exist. Derrida suggests the use of constructivist
narrative to challenge outmoded perceptions of class.
In a sense, Sontag uses the term 'postsemantic narrative' to denote
the role of the writer as poet. Several deappropriations concerning
constructivist narrative may be discovered.
It could be said that Marx promotes the use of dialectic objectivism
to deconstruct and modify sexual identity. Any number of discourses
concerning the genre of pretextual society exist.
However, the collapse, and subsequent economy, of constructivist
narrative depicted in Stone's Natural Born Killers emerges again in
JFK. An abundance of theories concerning the cultural paradigm of
consensus may be found.
Thus, in Heaven and Earth, Stone denies constructivist narrative; in
JFK, however, he analyses the materialist paradigm of consensus. The
main theme of the works of Stone is the role of the reader as poet.
But Sartre suggests the use of Debordist image to challenge the
status quo. Baudrillard uses the term 'Sontagist camp' to denote a
self-falsifying reality.
Therefore, several narratives concerning the role of the writer as
reader exist. Derrida uses the term 'Debordist image' to denote the
common ground between sexual identity and society.
1. Dietrich, B. I. A. (1977) The Meaninglessness of Consensus:
Debordist image in the works of Cage. O'Reilly & Associates
2. Scuglia, S. V. ed. (1986) Debordist image and constructivist
narrative. Schlangekraft
3. McElwaine, M. (1970) Reassessing Expressionism: Constructivist
narrative and Debordist image. Yale University Press
4. Dietrich, U. G. ed. (1994) Debordist image and constructivist
narrative. University of Massachusetts Press
5. Wilson, Y. (1981) Dialectic Constructions: Constructivist
narrative and Debordist image. University of Illinois Press
6. Scuglia, O. Y. ed. (1997) Libertarianism, Baudrillardist
simulation and Debordist image. Schlangekraft
7. von Ludwig, I. Q. E. (1978) The Meaninglessness of Sexual
identity: Debordist image in the works of Stone. University of
Michigan Press
a load of crap from a jw forum.
i thought everyone would gag enjoy.. .
i have recently written a short essay on the mode and operation .
Intro,
Interesting approach. It would probably be best to simply cut to the chase and not waste time aurguing the content. Thanks for the comments.
pseudo
a load of crap from a jw forum.
i thought everyone would gag enjoy.. .
i have recently written a short essay on the mode and operation .
Onacruse
I would like to reply to it, with something that is total BS, uses lots of big words and never gets to the point, but I'm not the greatest with words. Any suggestions.
pseudo
a load of crap from a jw forum.
i thought everyone would gag enjoy.. .
i have recently written a short essay on the mode and operation .
A load of crap from a JW Forum. I thought everyone would gag enjoy.
I have recently written a short essay on the mode and operation
of apostasy upon the individual attentive to its call. It was
designed primarily as a response to a brother inquiring about
this social phenomena, yet Heinz has most graciously permitted
me to post it here in light of recent developments amongst some
of our Christian family...
*** I would like to briefly discuss just why some individuals, in
spite of receiving a higher education and having a keen mind,
can momentarily or forth-rightly fall into the snare of apostate
reasoning. I use this term liberally, not to label persons as such,
but to describe their manner of thinking as it is subject to the
constraints of an oppositional viewpoint. It has come to my
attention, and indeed many others, that some Witnesses have
chosen to stand against the society on various issues; resulting
in confusion and perturbation on the part of those less
comprehensive of selective issues. Yet, one should not be too
surprised at such seemingly distressing events. Professor
Bryan Wilson, reader Emeritus in Sociology at Oxford University
correctly observes in a 1994 paper on apostasy:
"Every religion which makes claim to a definitive body of doctrine
and practice which it regards as exclusively its own, is likely to be
faced with the fact that from time to time some erstwhile
members will relinquish their allegiance and cease to subscribe
to the formalities of the faith, in at least some, perhaps all, of its
teachings, practices, organization, and discipline."
To be sure, this is a sad consequence of those who decide that
their own doctrinal understanding, or that of another presents
itself as a more expedient solution to questions that may arise
from the mouth of those who seek to dissuade others from
considering the Witnesses as a viable theological choice. Of
course, freedom to choose ones belief is a credit to the Creators
wisdom in that it allows personal motive to be exposed.
However, this freedom is often coerced by some who have no
other design than to repudiate their former associates through
the exposition of alleged doctrinal error.
Herein lies an important axiom that all who may be unaware of
the negative effects of apostate ideology do well to consider;
namely `APOSTASY DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE.' It cares not for
qualification or erudition. The reason for this is that apostasy
originates from the heart. It therefore searches for a loophole
within the framework of ones moral sensibilities simply because
it 'can', and it 'can' because it originates from the heart. Hence,
an ideology or philosophy generated through entropy, in this
case apostasy, will do more to systematically corrode one's
moral resilience than almost any other form of defection. By its
very nature apostate thinking seeks religious disaffiliation as its
ultimate goal. Notice how Wilson briefly construes the impetus
behind the apostate mindset:
"The disaffected and the apostate are in particular informants
whose evidence has to be used with circumspection. The
apostate is generally in need of self-justification. He seeks to
reconstruct his own past, to excuse his former affiliations, and to
blame those who were formerly his closest associates".
In harmony with this, a similar article by Lonnie D. Kliever,
Professor of Religious Studies at Southern Methodist University
concludes:
"... apostates always act out of a scenario that vindicates
themselves by shifting responsibility for their actions to the
religious group. Indeed, the various brainwashing scenarios so
often invoked against the new religious movements have been
overwhelmingly repudiated by social scientists and religion
scholars as nothing more than calculated efforts to discredit the
beliefs and practices of unconventional religions in the eyes of
governmental agencies and public opinion. Such apostates can
hardly be regarded as reliable informants by responsible
journalists, scholars, or jurists."
A further point to consider when investigating the engine driving
disaffection and apostasy is pride, which is capable of
reconstructing a persons self image AND the image presented
by others. For instance, when under the influence of extreme
pride `assurance' can often become `self-assurance'and
conviction of belief can turn to `convicted belief.' This unfortunate
reversal occurs primarily due to the emphasis of conviction
being transferred from the object (in this case an individual's
religious fraternity),to the subject (or in otherwords the prideful
person). Hence, no longer is one's religious institution the
provider of instruction, but instead becomes a harness that has
lost its usefulness, since now the primary source of spiritual
edification is qualified by personal preference.
This dynamic shift of everything that one may have considered
certain has become misappropriated by pride and then hidden
from the individual by pride itself!! Yet, very often this ball can be
put in motion through the cordial reception granted to apostate
reasoning. It is for good reason then that Jehovah admonished
his people not to take themselves too seriously when he
warned,
"Pride is before a crash and a haughty spirit before stumbling"
(Proverbs 16:18)
Yet, this self-destructive progression often goes unnoticed even
though the scriptures explain how such ruination is transferred.
For the inspired writer states that it is by his `mouth' that an
apostate brings his fellowman to ruin (Proverbs 11:9a)
Subsequently, when one uses apostate information to inform,
teach or excuse they are unwittingly succumbing to apostasy
themselves. Via these avenues apostasy then empowers
apostasy. (By this I mean to define the influence that apostate
ideology has over its victim, in that apostasy engenders pride
within an individual and then feeds off this same pride in order to
fortify the defection... And so the cycle continues...)
It is not difficult to see therefore how this viscous circle
deceptively stifles the intellect's ability to commit to `certainty' in
faith when doubt inevitably becomes the by-product of inquiry into
apostate reasoning. Consequently, regardless of the intellectual
or social aptitude of the one searching through apostate
material, there is often a betrayal, not necessarily of conviction of
truth at first but of comprehending the insidious power inherent
in apostate views. That is the REAL DANGER! By not
understanding this, or even worse, considering themselves
impervious to it's subtle allure, some have pulled the wool over
their own eyes and subjected themselves to the masquerades
of falsity, half truth and manipulated truth as being veritable truth
itself! In an unfinished paper concerning the social dynamics of
apostasy, this writer has listed three important reminders for
consideration when confronted by the taunts of apostate
ideology:
"By attempting to elicit a favourable emotive response to their
information, they [apostates] are therefore able to set the snare
that leads to doubt. The exponent of this data understands this
and is therefore better able to use such information to
emphasize apparent discrepancies, hypocrisy's, inconsistencies
and the like in order to play on the potential insecurities of the
reader. Consequently, the recipient of apostate information is at
a distinct disadvantage in three very profound ways.
1. The recipient does not usually know if the author's words are
true or false
2. The recipient does not usually know if the author is mixing
truth with falsehood
3. The recipient is usually unable to verify allegations and/or
assertions
The apostate knows this and is therefore capable of
manipulating the person who cannot or does not recognize the
inherent dangers in considering apostate convictions."
Although there is much more to be said concerning the
administration of apostate dogma, perhaps the most important
question if one is tempted to consider the viewpoint and/or
doctrinal treaty of a defector is:
"If it is important to comprehend an apostates argument `of
scripture'... Why did God see it important to condemn it
`through scripture?'" (compare Romans 16:17, Titus 3:10)
The truth is, it is impossible to answer this question by affirming
the initial premise without contravening Jehovah's injunction
against defectors and their viewpoint. ***
In pursuit of truth,xxxxxxx
pseudo
Armageddon
My last post would probably be: Opps!!!!!!!!!!
pseudo
i was just thinking.
since christmas is about the birth of christ, i know dec 25 was not his birthday, probly born around late sept or early oct. i guess he wanted to be born right before the baseball playoffs and world series, just kidding.
it was the early christian church that appointed dec 25th.
Second Atheism cannot consistently be lived. This is the MAIN point of our thread.
There is no need for an Atheist to a live a life in which every action is determined by his disbelief in God. Atheists are free to do, or not do anything they want. In a world dominated by religious beliefs, an Atheist would stick out like a sore thumb if they lived a life that was in constant conflict with society. Empathy towards others prevents Atheists from living such a life.
I have always felt that JW's do not celebrate Christmas, for reasons other than it's pagan origins. They attempt to go against the traditions of society, first to provide a witness for their beliefs and second to incite a self induced persecution. The ensuing persecution is then viewed as an indication that their beliefs are correct. Atheists do not need to propagate their beliefs and persecution is not needed as a crutch for their beliefs. In my opinion an Atheist that would live in such a manner would be repulsive.
Atheists are humans, living in societies that require certain behavior. They have no underlying motivation to act in a manner that would make them feel as if they are unique or righteous. They have nothing to prove to themselves or the god(s).
pseudo
i know the bible is true because.... * it is infallible.
there is not one contradiction with these pages.
humans are fallible; the bible is not.. * the word of god is the source of true wisdom.
Rem,
Thanks, for the info. Much like you, I was not completely convinced, but did find it an interesting possiblity. I hadn't seen how the gnostics beliefs could be tied in with this. I do plan on getting a copy of the book, it looks interesting.
pseudo
i know the bible is true because.... * it is infallible.
there is not one contradiction with these pages.
humans are fallible; the bible is not.. * the word of god is the source of true wisdom.
gumby,
Was the idea of a LITERAL messiah, a historical person made up in the minds of men?
Is it possible this man never existed?
I'll recommend a book that has all the documents and sources from which this information comes from. The book is called "The Jesus Mysteries". This is one book of MANY books that will verify what EXACTLY was the historical SETTING when Christianity arose.
When you learn of what the gnostics believed about Jesus, and how the "literalist" imposed a contrary belief, and see how the literalist COPIED an existing belif.....you will be impressed.
It also documents other writers of that time who told their opinions of those Christians who " literalized " Jesus.
There is much on this subject that by far MOST are not familiar with.
I vaguely remember coming across an idea such as this.
If I remember correctly, Paul's writings preceded the Gospels. Paul's writings alone did not provide sufficient biographical information. The Gospels were written to fill the void, adding flesh and bone to what Paul had originally started. This is supported by the fact that Paul never directly quotes the Gospels and some other facts that I have long forgotten.
I am wondering, is this the basis of the book you recommend?
pseudo
