Posts by Ireneus

10

Disproving one verse of the Bible means proving another verse!

by Ireneus in

last week’s newsweek magazine (february 10, 2018) made a surgical strike on jws teaching that soul is something that can be “destroyed” (mathew 10:28) and man is ‘dust unto which he would return’ (genesis 3:19) when its article (the increasing signs that human consciousness remains after death) made this conclusion: soul “does not become annihilated just because we’ve crossed the threshold of death.” (http://www.newsweek.com/where-do-you-go-when-you-die-increasing-signs-human-consciousness-after-death-800443) interestingly, bible also contains verses that show man has an eternal aspect (eccl 3:5; 12:7).. science is now in the right direction in line with the prediction francis crick, co-discoverer of the double-helix dna, made: “it is not true that mere firing of neurons in the brain could indicate consciousness….

physics has yet to explain how consciousness could come about through firing of neuron in the brain.”.

this also explains why some of the gospels were not included in the canon.

Ireneus

I am into my final year of MoN; hence I know among neuroscientists many believe in soul and others not which means many want to take their own conclusion from the findings of neuroscience.

Science has almost entered the domain of metaphysics and beyond which is inevitable because science is search of truth whereas the hard materialism now has to start softening with the concept of macro-universe of relativity and mass-energy dualism of Albert Einstein, the subatomic wave-particle equation of Erwin Schrodinger, the probability wave concept of Max Born and the Uncertainty Principle of Werner Heisenberg….. Modern physics has turned from the properties of Nature to the essence of it, the ultimate reality, thus is on the path to the divine destination through methodical explorations into the layers of matter, leading to consciousness. Let science take its own time. I don’t wait for endorsement of science for vital subject such as soul for which I have found proof my own way. When I was reading the Newsweek magazine last week in the College Library, I never thought of posting something in JW.net. But yesterday I was posting the same in my dream. When I got up, I thought ‘wow’ it is a good idea—I will post this. This simple thing is more than enough for me to know something immaterial within my body is always working even when my body is resting.

10

Disproving one verse of the Bible means proving another verse!

by Ireneus in

last week’s newsweek magazine (february 10, 2018) made a surgical strike on jws teaching that soul is something that can be “destroyed” (mathew 10:28) and man is ‘dust unto which he would return’ (genesis 3:19) when its article (the increasing signs that human consciousness remains after death) made this conclusion: soul “does not become annihilated just because we’ve crossed the threshold of death.” (http://www.newsweek.com/where-do-you-go-when-you-die-increasing-signs-human-consciousness-after-death-800443) interestingly, bible also contains verses that show man has an eternal aspect (eccl 3:5; 12:7).. science is now in the right direction in line with the prediction francis crick, co-discoverer of the double-helix dna, made: “it is not true that mere firing of neurons in the brain could indicate consciousness….

physics has yet to explain how consciousness could come about through firing of neuron in the brain.”.

this also explains why some of the gospels were not included in the canon.

Ireneus

Earnest,

Here are the last two paragraphs of the article:

How these patients were able describe objective events that took place while they were dead, we’re not exactly sure, just as we’re not exactly sure why certain parts of us appear to withstand death even as it takes hold of everything else. But it does seem to suggest that when our brains and bodies die, our consciousness may not, or at least not right away.

“I don’t mean that people have their eyes open or that their brain’s working after they die,” Parnia said. “That petrifies people. I’m saying we have a consciousness that makes up who we are—our selves, thoughts, feelings, emotions—and that entity, it seems, does not become annihilated just because we’ve crossed the threshold of death; it appears to keep functioning and not dissipate. How long it lingers, we can’t say.”

10

Disproving one verse of the Bible means proving another verse!

by Ireneus in

last week’s newsweek magazine (february 10, 2018) made a surgical strike on jws teaching that soul is something that can be “destroyed” (mathew 10:28) and man is ‘dust unto which he would return’ (genesis 3:19) when its article (the increasing signs that human consciousness remains after death) made this conclusion: soul “does not become annihilated just because we’ve crossed the threshold of death.” (http://www.newsweek.com/where-do-you-go-when-you-die-increasing-signs-human-consciousness-after-death-800443) interestingly, bible also contains verses that show man has an eternal aspect (eccl 3:5; 12:7).. science is now in the right direction in line with the prediction francis crick, co-discoverer of the double-helix dna, made: “it is not true that mere firing of neurons in the brain could indicate consciousness….

physics has yet to explain how consciousness could come about through firing of neuron in the brain.”.

this also explains why some of the gospels were not included in the canon.

Ireneus

Last week’s Newsweek magazine (February 10, 2018) made a surgical strike on JWs teaching that soul is something that can be “destroyed” (Mathew 10:28) and man is ‘dust unto which he would return’ (Genesis 3:19) when its article (The Increasing Signs That Human Consciousness Remains After Death) made this conclusion: Soul “does not become annihilated just because we’ve crossed the threshold of death.” (http://www.newsweek.com/where-do-you-go-when-you-die-increasing-signs-human-consciousness-after-death-800443) Interestingly, Bible also contains verses that show man has an eternal aspect (Eccl 3:5; 12:7).

Science is now in the right direction in line with the prediction Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the double-helix DNA, made: “It is not true that mere firing of neurons in the brain could indicate consciousness…. Physics has yet to explain how consciousness could come about through firing of neuron in the brain.”

This also explains why some of the gospels were not included in the canon. The best argument that we have an immaterial part (called Spirit/Soul) came from Jesus Christ. However, it is recorded in the Gospel of Thomas (not in the Traditional four Gospels). Jesus says: ‘If the flesh came into existence because of the Spirit, it is a marvel. But if the spirit arose from the flesh, it is a marvel of marvels.’ (Gospel of Thomas Saying 29)

In other words, what he means is that:

‘If the boat came into existence because of the boat-man, it is understandable.

But if the boat-man emerged from the boat, it defies all the known logic!’

10

Inconsistency involving Lot and Abraham

by Ireneus in

when god informed of his intention of destroying the wicked inhabitants of sodom and gomorrah abraham made extensive questioning, cross-questioning and bargaining with god till he gets satisfied.

(genesis 18:16-33) however, when god informed of his intention of murdering abraham’s own only-begotten, innocent son, he simply obeys without any questionings [which he should naturally have done more intensely than he did in the case of unrelated wicked people].. god too acted strangely!

no introduction of the subject with sufficient reasons.

Ireneus

Cold Steel,

You have to approach my OP as though you have not heard about teaching about Jesus' ransom sacrifice.

OP clearly says Father offering son as a sacrifice (both of Abraham and of God) is a human thought, written by humans. That means God is no where in the picture, says the Bible. (Luke 6:38)

10

Inconsistency involving Lot and Abraham

by Ireneus in

when god informed of his intention of destroying the wicked inhabitants of sodom and gomorrah abraham made extensive questioning, cross-questioning and bargaining with god till he gets satisfied.

(genesis 18:16-33) however, when god informed of his intention of murdering abraham’s own only-begotten, innocent son, he simply obeys without any questionings [which he should naturally have done more intensely than he did in the case of unrelated wicked people].. god too acted strangely!

no introduction of the subject with sufficient reasons.

Ireneus

When God informed of His intention of destroying the wicked inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah Abraham made extensive questioning, cross-questioning and bargaining with God till he gets satisfied. (Genesis 18:16-33) However, when God informed of His intention of murdering Abraham’s own only-begotten, innocent son, he simply obeys without any questionings [which he should naturally have done more intensely than he did in the case of unrelated wicked people].

God too acted strangely! No introduction of the subject with sufficient reasons. Straight away, God commands: "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about." (Genesis 22:2)

“Early the next morning Abraham got up and saddled his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. (Genesis 22:3)

Obviously, inventors of Jesus’ ransom sacrifice thought for a smooth entry of their incomprehensible subject with a precedence of Abraham’s offering of his son. So they invented story of Abraham’s sacrifice. But this backfires as it poorly depicts God. It gives the impression that God was not sure of the propriety of His idea of offering His son ‘to take away the sins of the world;’ hence He makes a trial as though to find out what its receptiveness could be, through the response of Abraham. This is not warranted in the case of all-wise God which shows this is all human thinking! To provide a basis for Abraham’s story, they had to invent Lot, and destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah—a story with no purpose because Lot’s daughters finally had to ‘get their father to drink wine so that they could lie down with him to have children from him’ (Genesis 19:30-36), children (Moab and Ben-Ammi) who became the ancestors of two nations Moabites andAmmonites that became enemies of Israel.

To produce one incomprehensible story of God offering His son to be murdered as sacrifice for the sins of the world, see how many incomprehensible stories that must precede it!

7

John the Baptist has no heavenly hope?

by Ireneus in

jws teach that john the baptist would not inherit kingdom of heaven.

however, there are problems with this teaching.. john’s mother elizabeth was both barren and too old to conceive.

(luke 1:7) birth of john was an act of “holy spirit.” (luke 1:15) then we find jesus saying: “among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than john the baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven [“kingdom of god,” luke 7:28] is greater than he.” (mathew 11:11; luke 7:28).

Ireneus

JWs teach that John the Baptist would not inherit Kingdom of Heaven. However, there are problems with this teaching.

John’s mother Elizabeth was both barren and too old to conceive. (Luke 1:7) Birth of John was an act of “Holy Spirit.” (Luke 1:15) Then we find Jesus saying: “Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven [“kingdom of God,” Luke 7:28] is greater than he.” (Mathew 11:11; Luke 7:28)

Greatness of John the Baptist lies in two factors:

1) He was born from the “Holy Spirit” and hence is of the “woman” of Gen 3:15 which JWs teach as the heavenly organization.

2) Life of John the Baptist was like a sacrificial dying for Jesus because he declared: “He must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:30)

In other words, not only by his birth but also by his action (extraordinary humility) greatness of John the Baptist has no match whom Jesus himself described as “more than a prophet.” (Mathew 11:9) After showering such great praises to John it is unlikely that Jesus would make sentence such as “whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven [“kingdom of God,” Luke 7:28] is greater than he” which can be interpreted by JWs as John sharing no heavenly hope, especially because of the fact that there cannot be grades in that Kingdom because rest of the Bible overwhelmingly argues that no one earns the right to inherit that Kingdom because all those who become part of new kingdom are bought with blood of Jesus when their inheritance was death, when they were slaves to sin and death; hence question of their greatness doesn’t even arise.

3

What is the blindness Jesus referred to in Mathew 15:14?

by Ireneus in

in the context of speaking about human teaching and its teachers (mathew 15:8, 9) jesus said: “they are blind guides.

if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.” (mathew 15:14).

its application need not be too limited because what is being subjected to our senses is very limited.

Ireneus

In the context of speaking about human teaching and its teachers (Mathew 15:8, 9) Jesus said: “They are blind guides. If the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.” (Mathew 15:14)

Its application need not be too limited because what is being subjected to our senses is very limited. Even with regard to our own body, we have a limited vision. It’s like seeing only the tip of our nose because our bodies are continuously being recycled with even 98% of all our atoms being replaced in less than a year. Heraclitus stated that one can’t step into the same river twice because there is constant change occurring. There is always something preceding to something which means there cannot be a beginning for anything—even for universe. Not seeing this endless aspect would amount to blindness.

13

Try this on a JW

by Saltheart Foamfollower in

this is not intended to expose wrong teachings etc, just to promote thinking and asking questions.. 1) ask if imperfection and death automatically follow sin.

jw will answer yes.. 2) ask if satan is imperfect then.. 3) sit back and watch them try to work out what the right answer should be.. sf.

Ireneus

Brilliant

30

Sign of apostasy

by Ireneus in

elders arranged a sort of informal visit by a more capable elder accompanied by another brother who is more qualified than me from academic background.

their purpose was to reason with me as a last resort to avoid a jc.. during the two-hour discussion, i could make my point clear to them: “i don’t think any one particular religion has the whole truth.

it may be existing as bits and piece in all religions and schools of thought.

Ireneus

Hi all,

Thank you for all the nice suggestions you all made. I will go by them. But I am sure they won’t come back because I could sense the degree of discouragement they themselves felt talking to me. I was using their own tactic—sticking to just one subject. They wanted me to be diverted on to the subject of the channel God is using today. But I was adamantly sticking to only one subject—Parable of Sheep and Goat. All religions were desperately trying to find a reason why we should love our neighbor. But this simple parable (which requires no interpretation) tells humans do not need a reason to love fellow humans. Humans love other humans because we are humans—that’s all. Every human being knows what being human is all about because it is our very nature. When someone gives us untruth, hurt, and ugly behavior it makes us disturbed because our very nature is truth, benevolence and beauty which are our core features. To unfold according to our very nature why do we need the help of an organization? One can choose to unfold or to not unfold, and God doesn't interfere with his choice.

30

Sign of apostasy

by Ireneus in

elders arranged a sort of informal visit by a more capable elder accompanied by another brother who is more qualified than me from academic background.

their purpose was to reason with me as a last resort to avoid a jc.. during the two-hour discussion, i could make my point clear to them: “i don’t think any one particular religion has the whole truth.

it may be existing as bits and piece in all religions and schools of thought.

Ireneus

Hi The Fall Guy,

You sound very practical and brief. Thank you for that. That is what I have determined to do in my heart. This was a case of unannounced visit. I won't entertain any more meeting--formal or informal.