Seeker

Joined

• started 44 topics
• posted 1,657 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Seeker

• 
  21

  Freemasonic Fascism/ Menace

  by sf in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  "masonic menace" and "freemasonic fascism":.

  < http://www3.sympatico.ca/mtronics/anticult/masonicmenace/.

  if man was supposedly created in gods image, then.....holy krap...we're all doomed.-skallywagger

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  Guest, you are welcome to research anything you want, without any problem. What I said about conjecture has to do with the type of material that gets posted here on this subject. When you see an article anywhere, in a magazine, a book, a web page, notice if what is asserted gets backed up with facts that can be verified. If so, it's worth researching further. If not, it's just conjecture.

  To take an obvious example, if I create a web page where I claim that George W. Bush is actually a poodle that disguises his identity to appear like a human, and I backed up this claim by quoting someone who said they saw him in canine form, would that be convincing? Not really. Anyone can make up a quote. Anyone mentally ill can see all sorts of things and give a real quote that bears little relation to reality.

  As we ex-JWs like to say, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If I want to claim the president is actually a poodle, I had better have some verifiable evidence to back that claim up. If the governing body of JWs wants to claim they are they faithful and discreet slave, they had better have some verifiable evidence to back that claim up. If someone wants to claim freemasons are secretly ruling the world, they had better have some verifiable evidence to back that claim up.

  So far, I've yet to see verifiable evidence that backs the masonic claims. Thus what I am left with are web pages that make lots of claims, quote people who make the same claims, and never back it up with anything that an observer can check for themselves. That makes what they are saying merely conjecture.

  It wouldn't surprise me to find out that there is a secret society that controls the world. All I ever ask for is evidence that is rational and verifiable. Until then, no matter how much of this stuff I read, I no more believe it than I believe the governing body is the faithful and discreet slave (lots of claims have been made for that conjecture, none of which stands up to scrutiny either).

  Feel free to ignore all of what I said. You are a free agent and can do whatever you like. I apply this same standard to all subjects in life, and it serves me well in finding out facts and weeding out empty conjecture.
• 
  18

  Witnesses just came at my door!!!!!

  by gilwarrior in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  holy crap!

  i was surfing through this site when i hear a knock at my door.

  no, it can't!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  Witnesses just came at my door!!!!

  Am I the only dirty-minded individual who saw the obvious sexual reference in the thread title? All I have to say is that preaching would be a lot more popular to JWs if they got to do that...
• 
  67

  Bible Error: The Visit to the Tomb

  by JosephAlward in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the following two accounts of the morning visit by the women to anoint jesus body are contradictory.

  according to mark, the women wondered how they would remove the stone covering the tomb, but they found that it had already been rolled away.

  matthew, however, says that when the women went to the tomb, there was an earthquake, and an angel came down from heaven, went to the tomb, and rolled the stone back.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  Matthew mentioned one angel who spoke to Mary, John mentions two. Maybe John was more inclusive than Matthew, but the essense of the accounts match

  In my opinion, that makes little sense. We're talking about something amazing, something that supposedly had happened only a few times in history. We're talking about a time of heightened emotions of despair turning to joy. And Matthew forgets to mention a materialized angel?! This is astounding stuff that is supposedly happening, and to Matthew it's just so much window dressing that he only bothers mentioning the one angel needed to propel the story?

  It makes a lot more sense when you realize there were no eyewitness gospel accounts, that all the stories are second-hand, and the details started to get garbled over time.
• 
  6

  Conspiracy's!!!!! ya gotta see this!

  by VeniceIT in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i don't know if you've watched the new show on tnn called 'conspiracy theory' hosted by kevin nellian (snl).. they have a panel with people on both sides of an issue.

  it's really funny.

  this week it's about secret societies.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  Any and all research in this subject will knock your socks off.

  Unless you are the type who wants credible evidence with your conjecture, in which case you will not only get to keep your socks on but you won't even have to untie your shoelaces.
• 
  15

  UN INFO FLYERS ON JW WINDSHIELDS?

  by stocwach in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  anyone thought of this idea for disseminating un issue to the rank and file?

  in my opinion it would be pretty easy to print up a bunch of one-pagers from one of the websites that put all the info in a concise format, and distribute them at night during the "service meeting" in the kingdom hall parking lot.. what do ya guys/gals think?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  I have a policy:

  If I get spam email, I refuse to do business with the company behind it.

  If I get a sales phone call, I refuse to do business with the company behind it.

  If I get a flyer on my car, I refuse to do business with the company behind it.

  So a person with my personality would have more harm done than good by this scheme. You would be violating my space, and I don't appreciate it.

  Plus you feed the JW paranoia into thinking Satan really has targetted them. Of course, like the fellow who walks up to women in a bar and says, "Wanna have sex?", he may get slapped 999 times and agreed to once, and he may use that one successful time to tell everyone, "It works!" So too, I'm sure you can find anecdotal evidence of successful results from slipping flyers on car windshields.

  But you are going to piss off a lot of other people in the process, and with good reason.
• 
  29

  George W. Bush: 9.30AM Sept 11 2001

  by 2SYN in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  simon, please add a 'conspiracy theories' section!

  hehe!

  check this out...could it be true?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  your car accident scenario was nice, but added little to the discussion. the fact is, youre trying to reach for something that just isnt there.

  Lay off, dude. Didn't you read what I wrote? I said I could see your point-of-view on the topic by the use of my car accident scenario. Instead of just posting my conclusion as I often do, I posted the thoughts that were going through my head as they went through them, so I kept everything, even the stuff I was correcting on the fly.

  I admit, his usage, though technically wrong, is probably a regionally-correct pattern, and thus I admit there was nothing odd about what he said.

  For the second time.

  OK?
• 
  29

  George W. Bush: 9.30AM Sept 11 2001

  by 2SYN in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  simon, please add a 'conspiracy theories' section!

  hehe!

  check this out...could it be true?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  There is a spin,

  Whoa! Quote me in context, please. I said there was no spin to my pointing out the meaning of a word used in a grammatical phrase in the context of trying to decipher its meaning. By the time we got to that point in the discussion, we had thrown politics out the window, and were just trying to figure out meaning. I was just genuinely trying to figure out some english usage by that point, which is why where was no spin involved.
• 
  69

  Does Looks Really Matter?

  by butalbee in

  1. social
  2. relationships

  does looks really matter in love?

  would you go out with someone who was not physically attractive if he/she had a big heart on the inside, a great personality, lot's of things in common with, etc...i guess i'm asking what's more important to you the person on the exterior or who he/she really is underneath?.

  lara

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  But you can't build a relationship on looks. There's got to be more, what a person is on the inside is what makes or breaks a relationship. The nice ass is just eye candy.

  That's the spirit, butalbee. You're getting the idea. May you find your ideal, a guy with a great inner self...and a nice ass too.
• 
  86

  Self Esteem

  by larc in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  self esteem.

  now i have seen people write about the fact that they have low self esteem, as an xjw.

  now, this not unique.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  Larc,

  Your statement so surprise me, I did a quick web search. Indeed, some people are saying psychoanalysis is not scientically accurate. I see what they are saying. In the early days, before we understood more modern medical diagnosis and treatment for disorders such as schizophrenia, Freud thought that everything could be analzyed and cured. As medical understanding of the chemical nature of the brain has grown, analysis has cut back to what it is good at, and left the medical stuff to the psychiatrists to handle.

  I agree with that. If you have a chemical disorder, you need a chemical correction.

  However, I was not talking about chemical disorders of the brain, but issues relating to self-esteem (the subject of this thread). If this low self-esteem was instilled in childhood by our parents, this is a classic example of something that analysis can help.

  I understand better what you were saying, but Freud is not discredited, unless there are analysts that are still trying to treat chemical disorders through therapy. As medicine has grown with knowledge, so has psychoanalysis. As long as you get a competent analyst, much good can be found.
• 
  29

  George W. Bush: 9.30AM Sept 11 2001

  by 2SYN in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  simon, please add a 'conspiracy theories' section!

  hehe!

  check this out...could it be true?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seeker

  hehe, this is fun...

  thats fine, you can stand by it, but the fact is, he didnt. he spoke what he meant, and until someone decided to spin it, no one even noticed.

  There is no spin if I point out that the phrase, "I saw an airplane hit the tower" means, in grammatical terms, using standard english rules, that he saw---

  hmmm...wait just a sec....I just realized something. Let's see, if I come across an auto accident aftermath, and I observe a car wrapped around a telephone poll, I could conceivably say, "I see a car hit that pole." And later on I could remark to a friend, "I saw a car hit the pole," as in I noticed that a car had hit the pole.

  It's horrible structure, but it just may be a regional variation within this country. To me, it's completely wrong. Yet I can believe it may be regionally common in some places, and that would explain why some of us read that stament and took it one way, and others of us couldn't see this explanation until it was pointed out.

  If someone is used to saying (incorrectly according to proper english usage) "I could care less," I'll call it wrong, for it is wrong. Yet it is regionally common in some places, and may seem correct to those who use it that way. In fact, if it catches on long enough and extensively enough, it becomes correct. That's english for ya!

  What a strange trip this thread has been...