Posts by King Solomon

49

BEAT that Child!

by Farkel in

jw
friends

this is sort of a continuation of threads on dubs and how they are conditioned to discipline their children.

someone questioned whether the society actually encouraged dubs to whup their children.

i only had enough time to dig up a few salient quotes from the wt magazine.

King Solomon

There is no juvenile delinquency in the animal realm, because there are no delinquent animal mothers.

Silly JWs: apparently there's not many animal behaviorists (not to mention anyone's who's heard of Piaget, a famous child psychiatrist who studied and wrote on child development) on the writing staff, for it's well-known that animals DO have a period where they break away from their parents and engage in deliquent behavior as "teens" (at least as much as ANY animal CAN be anthromorphized by being called "deliquents"). First example that comes to mind is crows: PBS had a show which outlined that behavior, called "A Murder of Crows". Same thing can be said for apes, chimps, etc where the male bachelors associate in groups as they separate from their parents.

I remember when my uneducated (home-schooled) nephew tried to tell me that humans were born with a built-in sense of right and wrong, saying how even a baby recognizes right from wrong, eg when it's pacifier is taken away, it starts to cry. Uh, yeah.... THAT'S why the baby cries: it's aware that it's basic human rights had been violated. Of course, they use that same rationale of inner sense of right from wrong to justify SPANKING infants, when the infant is far too young to understand WHY their parent is inflicting pain on them...

Anyone foolish enough to take child-rearing advice from JW literature reaps what they sow in the form of equally dysfunctional offspring. They'd be better off reading Reader's Digest.

28

You CAN continue associating with wordly/disfellowshipped family members AND get a higher education

by Anony Mous in

quotes:.

-- therefore, explain that a parent's decision an a child's associates would not be based on religion, but on the young one's conduct ... it will probably help if you acknowledge that this does not mean that all other youths whom your children are around in the neighborhood or at school are no good.

some of them may be pleasant and decent, as some of your neighbors, relatives, and workmates are.

King Solomon

You see the semantics? Most JW's don't understand the subtle word-play, where you almost need to be a lawyer to read between the lines.

Although the Bible makes a clear distinction between true and false teachings, God allows each person the freedom to choose how he or she will respond. (Deuteronomy 30:19, 20)

Note how they word it as, "God allows each person the freedom to choose" vs saying, "God allows each person to exercise their free will".

The difference is, the first wording reflects the idea that God does NOT give man Divine Permission to ignore his Divine Will (which is automatically defined as a sin: ANY action counter to His Divine Will is considered a sin). So by saying God gives people the "freedom to choose", they're basically saying that humans similarly have the "freedom" to jump out of an airplane without a parachute, but living after hitting the ground is up to you!

Either way they word it, they believe there's a gun against everyone's head: do what you're told or you die. It's a death threat, pure and simple.

No one should be forced to worship in a way that he finds unacceptable or be made to choose between his beliefs and his family

This is the OTHER side of the "freedom to choose" equation.

The subject of that sentence is the person who feels pressured to worship in a manner that's not heart-felt.

However, the words that aren't stated (but are well-known to be the case, even if unspoken) is that the REST of the family IS equally free to make the choice NOT to associate with the non-believer: they don't have to associate with the one who's questioning the faith (and hence, everyone elses). And even if one of the family members experience some remorse or guilt over shunning the questioning family member, THEY likewise don't have to choose between family or religious beliefs: they ALSO could be shunned as well, if the burden of making that choice is too much for them to bear. The Witnesses will put them out of their misery, and shun them, as well.

So even if the doubting Thomas is not officially shunned (DF/DA) by the Society, the JW grape-vine will take care of weeding out of the undesirables from amongst the rank-and-file.

Pretty slick (or actually, pretty sick).

28

You CAN continue associating with wordly/disfellowshipped family members AND get a higher education

by Anony Mous in

quotes:.

-- therefore, explain that a parent's decision an a child's associates would not be based on religion, but on the young one's conduct ... it will probably help if you acknowledge that this does not mean that all other youths whom your children are around in the neighborhood or at school are no good.

some of them may be pleasant and decent, as some of your neighbors, relatives, and workmates are.

King Solomon

Second, all children are admonished to show honor to father and mother.

Heh, I thought the commandment as delivered by Moses in tablet form said, "honor they Father and Mother"; not just to SHOW them honor, but to actually PROVE it via actions (versus simply putting on pretenses, as for show). Because shunning a parent is defo NOT showing honor to them, whether to their dignity or recognizing their basic humanity.

WTS are masters of doing and saying things for pretense, for show, just like the Pharasees whom Jesus despised for makng a great show of their rituals.

29

The 144 000, what do they do every day?

by Lazarus in

the answer is, of course, nothing because they don't exist.

but what does a jw think what his kings (and queens???

) do all day long?.

King Solomon

Hey, that's probably it, Black Sheep.

Anyone else remember the JW urban legend of a young sister who was out in door-to-door alone, and knocked on the door of a householder (who was arrested just hours afterwards, as the serial rapist they had been looking for)? When asked by the Police why he didn't try anything funny on the sister (the Police somehow knew that she had been there a few hours earlier: don't worry your pretty little heads over HOW they knew that!), the rapist said, "What, do you think I'm NUTZ?!? I would've, as she was pretty hot, but there were those TWO BURLY GUYS with her."

So, the only question is, anyone know if CT Russell worked out alot? Was he buff?

33

Can we Die After the Thousand Years and Final Test?

by God_Delusion in

howdy guys and gals,.

i am currently researching some material on what watchtower doctrine says with regards to punishments jehovah candish out to us after the thousand year reign and the final test.. my mother (a brilliant woman) always told me that if a human purposefully went against jehovah after the thousand years and the final test, jehovah would instantly put them to death.

is this true?

King Solomon

Sounds like the WTS doesn't believe what it calls the final test is really the final test.

Yup. One of the elements I first questioned as a 10 y.o. kid was, so how exactly does all of this misery actually settle the issue, once and for all? So 6,000 yrs of misery has occurred, simply because a random fallen angel said, "uh, YHWH, you're doing it wrong. I think can do better..."?

That's a theme used in Westerns, where a young upstart with a pistol is out to grab the title of "fastest gun in the West", so challenges the title-holder to a shoot-out in the streets of Dodge City; after he's dead, another one is on the side-lines, waitng to take his place.

Job's test didn't address the issue? Noah's Flood (a proto-Armageddon, if you will) didn't?

The whole concept of YHWH needing to sacrifice his own Son reflects barbaric ritual beliefs, just like Abraham's test of sacrificing his first-born son does (and WHAT is the deal with YHWH's fascination with first-borns? Another ancient cultic ritual, based on scientific misunderstanding).

Besides, who's serving as the jury in this Divine Court Case, in the matter of Satan vs YHWH? Just like where does mankind go to sue God for violating ANY of his Divine Covenants, for breech of contract, if He fails to uphold His end of the bargain? Oh, that's right: YHWH is Judge, Jury, and Executioner, just like He was with Adam and Eve. A&E were immortal, in name only: their continued existence was dependent on following YHWH's instructions to a tee.

(frankly, I suspect the Adam and Eve characters were trying to commit suicide, and were disappointed when they didn't die that "very day". They thought they found a way out, LOL!)

It's all nutso, of course: JWs are buying their spirituality out of a can, pre-packaged, not bothering to put any thought into it. It's missing the whole point of spirituality, where it's not so much finding the answer that counts, as much as making the INDIVIDUAL journey. JWs assemble their spiritual tent on the lawn, and take a spiritual journey without so much as leaving their own property, thinking they've found the answer.

The irony is JWs go to Salt Lake City on special assignment to "underserved areas", and ask Mormons, "If you weren't born into a Mormon community, do you think you'd still be a Mormon?" Of course, the JWs asking the question often are 3rd and 4th generation JWs themselves, with THEIR entire network of friends and families tied into the JW life. The question they ask others is the very same question they should be asking of themselves (it's funny how that works, isn't it?).

24

Jehovah's Witnesses and magic ... is some magic okay? where do you draw the line?

by wannabefree in

this question came to my mind today as i was cleaning with my handy dandy mr. clean magic eraser.. .

with little to no effort put forth, this white little anomaly erases tea and coffee stains from your favorite mug and makes red kool-aid stains disappear from counter tops.. .

what kind of dark magic is contained in this soft, white, non-threating piece of foam rubber?.

King Solomon

In the case of the Magic Eraser, here's the secret of how it works: the white pad is a piece of melamine plastic foam. Melamine (melmac) is a pretty hard plastic, and in use the foam breaks down into little tiny hard abrasive particles. The abrasice particles remove a thin layer of the offensive mark. when you scrub with it.

Nanana, I can't HEEAARR you, I can't HEEAARR you...

There will be no such science talk around here: understanding how the World works is forbidden knowledge, as it undermines a belief in magic, which undermines a belief in supernatural forces, which in turn undermines a belief in You Know Who... ;)

24

Jehovah's Witnesses and magic ... is some magic okay? where do you draw the line?

by wannabefree in

this question came to my mind today as i was cleaning with my handy dandy mr. clean magic eraser.. .

with little to no effort put forth, this white little anomaly erases tea and coffee stains from your favorite mug and makes red kool-aid stains disappear from counter tops.. .

what kind of dark magic is contained in this soft, white, non-threating piece of foam rubber?.

King Solomon

I never heard of some Witnesses not allowing their children to eat the cereal Lucky Charms. Of course,besides the fact,that it probably isn't too healthy,that's just nuts.

Ah, the things that were forbidden in the name of not wanting to make God unhappy.

The reality is Smurfs, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, TeleTubbies, etc were banned by many, simply because parents thought they were dumb/goofy. It's the same situation that makes parents say, "the music you kids play today is noise/junk; it's not like OUR music, which was REAL MUSIC!". People forget that the parental units hating it IS an important element to a new generation of music (eg rap): it's not fun UNLESS they DO hate it...

33

Can we Die After the Thousand Years and Final Test?

by God_Delusion in

howdy guys and gals,.

i am currently researching some material on what watchtower doctrine says with regards to punishments jehovah candish out to us after the thousand year reign and the final test.. my mother (a brilliant woman) always told me that if a human purposefully went against jehovah after the thousand years and the final test, jehovah would instantly put them to death.

is this true?

King Solomon

This is perhaps the most honest of the apologeticist's arguments I've seen:

From http://www.gotquestions.org/if-God-knew.html

So, we are left with the following questions: Why create mankind with the knowledge of the fall? Why create mankind knowing that only some would be "saved?" Why send Jesus knowingly to die for a people that knowingly fell into sin? From man’s perspective, it does not make sense. If the meta-narrative moves from paradise, to paradise lost, to paradise regained, why not just go straight to paradise regained and avoid the whole paradise lost interlude?

The only conclusion we can come to, in view of the above assertions, is that God’s purpose was to create a world in which His glory could be manifest in all its fullness. The glory of God is the overarching goal of creation. In fact, it is the overarching goal of everything He does. The universe was created to display God’s glory ( Psalm 19:1 ), and the wrath of God is revealed against those who fail to glorify God ( Romans 1:23 ). Our sin causes us to fall short of God’s glory ( Romans 3:23 ), and in the new heaven and new earth, the glory of God is what will provide light ( Revelation 21:23 ). The glory of God is manifest when His attributes are on perfect display, and the story of redemption is part of that.

The best place to see this in Scripture is Romans 9:19-24 . Wrath and mercy display the riches of God’s glory, and you cannot get either without the fall of mankind. Therefore, all of these actions—fall, election, redemption, atonement—serve the purpose of glorifying God. When man fell into sin, God’s mercy was immediately displayed in not killing him on the spot. God’s patience and forbearance were also on display as mankind fell deeper into sin prior to the flood. God’s justice and wrath were on display as He executed judgment during the flood, and God’s mercy and grace were demonstrated as He saved Noah and his family. God’s wrath and justice will be revealed in the future when He deals with Satan once and for all ( Revelation 20:7-10 ).

The ultimate exhibition of God’s glory was at the cross where His wrath, justice, and mercy met. The righteous judgment of all sin was executed at the cross, and God’s grace was on display in pouring His wrath for sin on His Son, Jesus, instead of on us. God’s love and grace are on display in those whom He has saved ( John 3:16 ; Ephesians 2:8-9 ). In the end, God will be glorified as His chosen people worship Him for all eternity with the angels, and the wicked will also glorify God as His justice and righteousness will finally be vindicated by the eternal punishment of all unrepentant sinners ( Philippians 2:11 ). None of this could have come to pass without the rebellion of Satan and the fall of Adam and Eve.

The classic objection to this position is that God’s foreknowledge and foreordination of the fall damages man’s freedom. In other words, if God created mankind with full knowledge of the impending fall into sin, how can man be responsible for his sin? The best answer to this question can be found in the Westminster Confession of Faith chapter III:

“God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established” (WFC, III.1)

What this is saying is that God ordains future events in such a way that our freedom and the working of secondary causes (e.g., laws of nature) are preserved. Theologians call this “concurrence.” God’s sovereign will flows concurrently with our free choices in such a way that our free choices always result in the carrying out of God’s will (by “free choices” we mean that our choices are not coerced by outside influences).

To summarize, God knew that Satan would rebel and that Adam and Eve would sin in the Garden of Eden. With that knowledge, God still created Lucifer and Adam and Eve because creating them and ordaining the fall was part of His sovereign plan to manifest His glory in all its fullness. Even though the fall was foreknown and foreordained, our freedom in making choices is not violated because our free choices are the means by which God’s will is carried out.

@@@@@@

WOW, what cynical rationalization, as it admits that YHWH is a sociopath who demands constant validation that he's the biggest, baddest, omni-omni'est deity on the polytheistic bunch (which BTW, doesn't explain why his Chosen People were repeatedly taken captive after their land was invaded, what, like 8x, by foreign powers with THEIR foreign Gods? Yeah, it was something THE Hebrews did wrong....)

At the very least, YHWH is made out to be a petulant child who constantly demands approval, with his "mommy, look at me now!" cries for attention and glory.

Of course, the rationalization above only opens MORE cans of worms, since if God actually is operating from some undivulged Top-Secret Master Plan (perhaps code-named "Operation Glory"), then humans choosing their "free choice" to sin ALSO fit into the Master Plan: they're giving YHWH an excuse to demonstrate His Power, His Glory.

So Satan isn't the "bad guy", but an angel/actor assigned to play the critical role of villain; Hebrews are familiar with this concept of a fall guy, since their literally released a goat (called a scape-goat) into the Wilderness to die, as a sacrificial victim to carry off their sins and atone for them. Jews were indoctinated in offering sacrifices; the symbolism of lambs/sheep to be sacrificed (not "saved") to be slaughtered and eaten was not lost on them.

So who's the martyr for YHWH again: Jesus, Satan, or both?

@@@@

The NT, the literary work of Xianity, is the ULTIMATE example of fan fiction, where someone hijacked Judaism's plot-line in an attempt to take the story from a "Jewish-members-only" direction to one where membership was broadened to Gentiles who joined the group (but still making another "in-group").

The whole premise Abrahamic religions are based on is so bat-guano crazy, it's amazing anyone takes it seriously, much less gives their or their children's lives away (the one only you'll ever have, folks) in it's name...

24

Jehovah's Witnesses and magic ... is some magic okay? where do you draw the line?

by wannabefree in

this question came to my mind today as i was cleaning with my handy dandy mr. clean magic eraser.. .

with little to no effort put forth, this white little anomaly erases tea and coffee stains from your favorite mug and makes red kool-aid stains disappear from counter tops.. .

what kind of dark magic is contained in this soft, white, non-threating piece of foam rubber?.

King Solomon

WOW, a real-live example of quote-mining before our very eyes.

Catch this one?

The Encyclopedia Americana states: “In some instances, magical actions may serve to compel spirits.”

As if the editors of the Encyclopedia Americana actually believe in magic, LOL! The words were probably pulled from an article describing magical rituals (eg voodoo) and the Encyclopedia was describing the beliefs of the practitioners, NOT saying magic is REAL. No one credible believes in the supernatural, as it's never been scientifically substantiated, EVER. NOT ONCE.

All the more ironic is the WTBTS writer had the audacity to mention the unscriptural nature of deception in the sentence before the one above:

God’s Word says: “You must not deceive, and you must not deal falsely anyone with his associate.”—Leviticus 19:11.

Par for the course for WTBTS to do that stuff, eg in the book where they were trying to disprove evolution, they actually quote-mined words from scientists and famous evolutionary biologists, making it out as if they didn't believe in evolution! There were names of biologists who are well-known within the scientific community (eg David Attenborough, who's produced marvelous nature shows for PBS), so it raised a red flag for me; however, a non-science-minded person would accept the words at face value, and not even realize the deception that was taking place: you cannot quote-mine from someone who doesn't agree with your conclusion, who disagrees with the very conclusion you're trying to prove! It's dishonest!

I guess deception in God's name is OK, since the ends justify the means? That's so slimy, I wish Hell existed, just so they'd be punished for the intellectual deceit.

7

A word for your vocabulary

by Slidin Fast in

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:documentproperties> <o:revision>0</o:revision> <o:totaltime>0</o:totaltime> <o:pages>1</o:pages> <o:words>60</o:words> <o:characters>342</o:characters> <o:company>shu</o:company> <o:lines>2</o:lines> <o:paragraphs>1</o:paragraphs> <o:characterswithspaces>401</o:characterswithspaces> <o:version>14.0</o:version> </o:documentproperties> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-gb</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>ja</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> <w:usefelayout /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]startfragment.

King Solomon

Heh, I know a non-Witness who kept a copy of the old blue publication that had the words "The Truth" embossed in gold on it's cover, just so he could go over to his bookshelf and show someone the cover, and then act like he was looking up the truth for anything and everything.

Lil' hint, folks: any religion that produces a book that touts to offer "the truth" isn't it. I know a snow-job when I see it. :)