Posts by King Solomon

35

Offending Religion with Reality......

by AK - Jeff in

.

King Solomon

Sorry. I am all for tolerance. Tolerance does NOT include being ashamed to assert your own beliefs when confronted by someone who is so delusional they think God talks to them exclusively. Mental illness does exist.

Kinda makes you wonder how many potential clinically-diagnosable psychotics ARE out there, protected under the umbrella of practicing their religion; hence never diagnosed, simply because they claim to hear the voice of God (which somehow makes their psychosis seem benign in the eyes of society).

4

got a visit yesterday

by finally awake in

jw
friends

apparantly, the dubs are working the territory our house is in.

i was at work, but just ron was home when two sisters rang the bell.

i should point out that ringing our bell is a bit of a challenge since just ron removed the actual button and there are just two bare wires sticking out of the wall.

King Solomon

Yup, all JW friendships are conditional friendships, maintained on the condition of... well you know what. It ain't TRUE friendship, that's for sure.

47

Trust me ...I'm a doctor ;-)

by Kudra in

jw
friends

as of this morning, i *am* a doctor!.

dr kudra, phd!.

la de da!.

King Solomon

Congrats!

Now, do you mind if I ask you about this pain I'm experiencing in my right side whenever I move like THIS?

(better get used to that kind of thing, as people ALWAYS will say that to you, regardless of what doctorate degree you hold: even a JD). ;)

30

Odd, isn't it? Genesis never mentions Satan; Job mentions a serpent or Adam maybe once or not at all - and Eve gets 4 refs in whole Bible

by kepler in

my concordance searches indicate eve is mentioned twice in the ot and twice in the new.

i guess elsewhere in genesis she must be the wife or the woman.

interesting: since she was the only woman in the world and adam was the only man, i wonder how husband and wife as terminology were invented?

King Solomon

You'd think any issues about universal sovereignty raised by Adam and Eve's rebellion would have been settled as soon as they died.

No, you're getting it ALL wrong. See, God is long-suffering and kind (when He wants to be, right? Except for the Flood thing: he blew a fuse with that one). He wants to give Satan every chance to see the error of his ways, and they could kiss and make up (no matter how many humans have to die before it happens). ;)

27

Aliens/Demons

by DATA-DOG in

just curious, am i the only one who considers the possibility that " demons " may be " aliens".

or that aliens are other races who have sided with demons, and that we are going to see some serious " war of the worlds " stuff, vaporization included?

maybe there are other races of beings giving the governments help or influencing them?

King Solomon

They didn't reproduce by masturbation. It's called asexual reproduction.

Or, you could realize that older creation myths from the same area that Genesis came from (Mesopotamia) feature a God (the Sun-God, Atum) who masturbated other beings into existence (Shu and Tefnut: goofy names, huh? Not a serious name like Yahweh!).

I kinda like the God who masturbated thing: it certainly explains ALOT about the internet, LOL!

Instead, the Bible completely side-steps the "who created Yahweh?" question by essentially saying, "Never mind that: Yahweh just always WAS, OK?" There's plenty of similarities between the creation Genesis myth and the others, including the above one, and with the Greeks.

30

Odd, isn't it? Genesis never mentions Satan; Job mentions a serpent or Adam maybe once or not at all - and Eve gets 4 refs in whole Bible

by kepler in

my concordance searches indicate eve is mentioned twice in the ot and twice in the new.

i guess elsewhere in genesis she must be the wife or the woman.

interesting: since she was the only woman in the world and adam was the only man, i wonder how husband and wife as terminology were invented?

King Solomon

Interesting: Since she was the only woman in the world and Adam was the only man, I wonder how husband and wife as terminology were invented?

Attend any JW marriage, and they always refer to God's giving Eve to Adam as the first marriage ceremony (in Gen 2, I think: you know, the bit about ribs taken from Adam, bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh).

Again, Job on Adam (KJV 31:33):"If I covered my transgressions, as Adam, by hiding my iniquity in my bosom..."

The NJB: "Have I ever concealed my transgression from others or kept my fault a secret in my breast?"

Uh, Adam apparently managed to hide from the presence of omnipresent YHWH (scriptures say Adam hid from the presence of the Lord, and hence why you had YHWH calling out, "Where art thou, Adam?" as if they were playing Marco Polo or Hide-and-Seek). But if cowering in the Garden and hiding was considered equivalent to "concealing his sin", then, sure (although Adam quickly admitted it, and passed the blame to Eve and back to God).

BTW, the serpent is a symbol loaded with meaning within much of the World's mythology; it means NOTHING to us today, since the cultural significance has been lost to most. Understanding the implications of a talking serpent is a very DEEP issue.

Re: the inconsistencies found between the various Gospels, that was the basis for Prof Bart Ehrman's initial loss of faith while pursuing his doctor of divinity degree (he's now a Professor, teaching scriptural criticism, and author of many books on the topic). One of his assignments for his students to do is perform a side-by-side comparison of the various accounts by the apostles (remember that they were written 40 yrs AFTER the events depicted took place, and many authors were not even eyewitnesses to the events, or hadn't met Christ).

Also, remember that the books that appear in the Bible are but a small COLLECTION of such stories commonly written at the time, as popular fiction. There's many books which didn't make the cut (canonization process, which took place 400 yrs later). Same thing with the apocryphal works found and called the Dead Sea Scrolls (probably an Essene library, a Jewish cult at the time of Christ, along with the Pharisees and Saducees: some of Jesus' most inspired famous words and slogans can be found in their writings which survive, as he was ripping off their concepts). Few modern believers have heard of, much less read, eg the Book of Enoch, etc.

24

The WTS "Brain Drain"

by Quendi in

i posted this on another thread and am pasting it here to start a new one because i would be interested in getting others' thoughts on it.. there has been a downward spiral in the quality of the written publications since the death of fred franz in december 1992. whatever else can be said about franz, the man did have some education and his writing was of good quality.

others in the writing department also had some skill and command of language that gave cogency to their work.

but since franz's death, a huge leadership vacuum has opened in the wts.

King Solomon

So the downturn which you observe, Quendi, fits a trend which began with the death of Russell. And the Rutherfordesque bullying of the rank and file into unquestioning acceptance of the oracles of the Wise Old Men can only serve to ensure that this trend will continue.

Yup, great post.

Any lurker SHOULD be asking themselves WHY the writing skills of the spiritual medium should even be relevant, since ALL ideas of a prophet are supposed to be due divine inspiration, an accurate reflection of His message. So why should the quality of the message change, if it stems from the same Divine source?

What scripture was it that said God could even make the rocks cry out to reveal his wishes, if he wanted? So YHWH supposedly can inspire even an inanimate object to convey his message, but unfortunately He's quite powerless to accurately transmit his message via men, due to limitations of their personal writing (which no doubt stems from their boring personalities)?

43

Will we ever see another Ray Franz?

by Emery in

jw
friends

will we ever see another governing body member leave the organization like ray franz did and speak out against them?.

one can only imagine the kind of dirt that's been concealed behind those gb sessions since the 1980's.. what are your thoughts?.

King Solomon

Bill,

Yup. He slyly rationalized his deceptive writing by using the oldest excuse ever, the same one used in Nuremburg War Crimes trial: I was just following orders, just doing what I was expected to do. I KNEW it was wrong, but I did it anyway.

Apparently the crisis of conscience didn't lead to an attempt to mitigate the damage until AFTER it perfectly clear that he'd never be allowed back, as a child who destroys his toy saying, "if I can't have it, then NO ONE can!" (Not that anyone would act differently; like I said, his action DOES have the silver lining of pointing out the LIES of the WTBTS)

His story SHOULD serve as a cautionary tale to those who squander the most productive years of their life in volunteer preaching work: unless you're a trust fund baby (independently wealthy, and don't give it to the Society), you should be building up your Earthly assets, preparing for your later years (I know, how silly is THAT idea, when YHWH will ALWAYS PROVIDE! Wouldn't you rather be like Franz, doing manual labor as a gardener, at 65? Or the older brother he mentioned in his book, with a sick wife at home, doing manual labor in his 80's?)

Balaamsass (nice pix, BTW: that ass is getting a lesson about the physics of leverage, whether he wanted to or not!) said,

BUT.... I KNOW some in the legal department are sickened by what they have seen. HOWEVER if they go public..they will be disbarred...WTBTS is the "Client". Some speak quiety and go softly into the night. They do lurk here. Many have joined the Legal Department as "True Believers", unlike most JWs they have been educated to THINK, they understand US law and.... MOSAIC and Christian legal concepts. (Can you imagine what is going through the mind of an educated idealist SISTER in the legal Department when she has to take crap during a depo from a high school drop-out elder?) I know some were working for change behind the scenes, but power corrupts. Will change happen, I doubt it. Will someone else write like Ray, I doubt it. Will more leave and perhaps post some juicy tidbits here......perhaps...but it would cost them a career.....so I doubt it. They will fade...... perhaps throw a case or two.........an ending like in the movie "The Firm" would be too much to dream..... :) Only time will tell.

I've gotta wonder if ANYONE in "JW Legal Dept" has even reflected that the name of the dep't itself is the ultimate misnomer (eg like "Military Intelligence"), based on Jesus' words at Matt 5:38 (AND their hypocrisy in ignoring them):

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. ...

Granted, Jesus is offering absolutely FOOLISH advise, which must be taken as literally (this is no metaphor, but he's over-riding the "old eye for an eye" priniciple which was not just "heard somewhere": it's IN the torah, said as LAW!). But wait, didn't he also say, "I didn't come to change the law (torah), but to fulfill it (that is, it's prophecies). I smell a rat....

On a related note, I was surprised to read on the jwfacts site that the Legal Dept had filed amicus curae briefs on the "Swaggert vs CA State Board of Equalization" case (a taxation matter which Swaggert lost). For any non-lawyers reading, 'amicus curae' is a Latin phrase which ANY lawyer knows means, "friend of the court".

Such briefs are filed when parties not directly involved in the matter (ie not a party named in the matter as either the defendent or plaintiff) MAY voluntarily file THEIR OPINIONS of how the case should be decided. It's basically an opportunity for 3rd parties to offer relevant case law and/or legal theories that the court may have overlooked, so that the court doesn't make a bad decision which would effect them indirectly.

Now, JWs are NOT named as defendents to the action, but are VOLUNTARILY meddling in the courts, even identifying themselves as "friends of the court" to do so? Aren't JWs SUPPOSED to remain neutral in ALL Worldly judicial and political matters?

Can you imagine Jesus sitting on the steps outside the Roman courts, scribbling little notes offering his legal opinions on them, just so he can share his unsoliticed legal opinions with his Roman "friends" inside? Does the Bible not really mean what it says, at James 4?

You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.

It seems filing unsolicited amicus curae briefs is the VERY DEFINITION of seeking friendship with the World's judicial system, sending little Valentine's Day notes to the courts, wanting to be their "friends"....

Of course, the average rank-and-file JW publisher is completely unaware of the actions of the Legal Dept (which is controlled by the GB), let alone understands Latin to know what amicus curae means (and represents). So there's very little risk of creating a PR problem, and perhaps a good argument for why JWs are encouraged NOT to learn secular knowledge, or to do independent research on ANYTHING: it's always safer to keep sheep in the "darkness" to calm them (and WTBTS ironically refers to their path as "the light" in the topsy-turvy world of WTBTS). The darkness of ignorance means they don't ask pesky, bothersome questions.

43

Will we ever see another Ray Franz?

by Emery in

jw
friends

will we ever see another governing body member leave the organization like ray franz did and speak out against them?.

one can only imagine the kind of dirt that's been concealed behind those gb sessions since the 1980's.. what are your thoughts?.

King Solomon

Here's an excerpt from his book I found to be a bit disquieting:

Months of research were spent on this one subject of “Chronology” and it resulted in the longest article in the Aid publication.28 Much of the time was spent endeavoring to find some proof, some backing in history, for the 607 B.C.E. date so crucial to our calculations for 1914. Charles Ploeger, a member of the headquarters staff, was at that time serving as a secretary for me and he searched through the libraries of the New York city area for anything that might substantiate that date historically.

We found absolutely nothing in support of 607 B.C.E. All historians pointed to a date twenty years later. Before preparing the Aid material on “Archae- ology” I had not realized that the number of baked-clay cuneiform tablets found in the Mesopotamian area and dating back to the time of ancient Babylon numbered into the tens of thousands. In all of these there was nothing to indicate that the period of the Neo-Babylonian Empire (in which period Nebuchadnezzar’s reign figured) was of the necessary length to fit our 607 B.C.E. date for the destruction of Jerusalem. Everything pointed to a period twenty years shorter than our published chronology claimed.

Cuneiform tablet
Though I found this disquieting, I wanted to believe that our chronology was right in spite of all the contrary evidence, that such evidence was somehow in error. Thus, in preparing the material for the Aid book, much of the time and space was spent in trying to weaken the credibility of the archeological and historical evidence that would make erroneous our 607 B.C. E. date and give a different starting point for our calculations and therefore an ending date different from 1914.

Charles Ploeger and I made a trip to Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, to interview Professor Abraham Sachs, a specialist in ancient cuneiform texts, particularly those containing astronomical data. We wanted to see if we could obtain any information that would indicate any flaw or weakness whatsoever in the astronomical data presented in many of the texts, data that indicated our 607 B.C.E. date was incorrect. In the end, it became evident that it would have taken a virtual conspiracy on the part of the ancient scribes—with no conceivable motive for doing so—to misrepresent the facts if, indeed, our figure was to be the right one. Again, like an attorney faced with evidence he cannot overcome, my effort was to discredit or weaken confidence in the witnesses from ancient times who presented such evidence, the evidence of historical
texts relating to the Neo-Babylonian Empire. In themselves, the arguments I presented were honest ones, but I know that their intent was to uphold a date for which there was no historical support.

So, despite our heightened appreciation of certain principles, the Aid book nonetheless contained many examples of our efforts to be loyal to the Society’s teachings.

So basically a nice way of saying he knowingly wrote lies to support the WTBTS.

43

Will we ever see another Ray Franz?

by Emery in

jw
friends

will we ever see another governing body member leave the organization like ray franz did and speak out against them?.

one can only imagine the kind of dirt that's been concealed behind those gb sessions since the 1980's.. what are your thoughts?.

King Solomon

I know I'm going to get grilled for saying this, but I don't see Ray Franz as some kind of saint that some make him out to be.

He didn't seem to experience any crisis of conscience while 'spinning' and lying for the WTBTS as he wrote all those articles, or serving as a WTBTS apologist when he KNEW he was supporting unscriptural policy (I remember him writing about having to cherry-pick evidence to support the date for the first destruction of the Temple, and when they couldn't find any, he shifted gears to falsely attacking the credibility of the experts who offered the correct answer).

It was only after it became apparent to him that he was effectively kicked out in a power struggle, and wouldn't hold ANY position of responsibility in the JWs (not even as an elder: that idea was shot down from Brooklyn when the local congregation tried to do it, after he resigned from GB) and AFTER being DFed, that he wrote COC. He probably decided that if he couldn't play the game any longer, then no one else could: he'd show them. Sure, it's childish, but that's human nature.

He'd have earned more respect from me had he written COC WHILE on GB, published, and THEN resigned from GB and publicly DAing himself before they could DF him.

Not that it matters: his book rings pretty true to me and to those I've talked to who actually "served" (slave-labored) at Bethel when he was there. I believe what he did was incredibly helpful in exposing the scam, and hence his motives are not a concern to me: while the motives MAY be suspect, the conclusion is right/just. I doubt he'd have killed the goose that laid the golden egg, had he believed he'd be able to continue benefiting from it.

Besides, does anyone really care if there's ethical members on the GB, when you KNOW it's a Spiritual Ponzi scheme, a scam? The entire endeavor is unethical, morally-bankrupt, since it's based on lies (the Bible being the largest accumulation of unproven hypotheses and lies stacked onto each others, like a Tower of Babel).