I recall thinking about that a few times. I don't believe that they ever tried to explain it. I think the split between the heaven/earth expectations was Rutherford's idea. He doesn't strike me as the sort who cared if the math wasn't quite right.
TonusOH
JoinedPosts by TonusOH
-
43
How do JWs know that less than 150,000 Christians existed before the 20th Century?
by Vanderhoven7 inaccording to watchtower, only anointed christians existed between the first and 20th centuries.
the great crowd of other sheep only began forming after the 20th century started.. how do they support this conclusion?
.
-
-
-
77
How would you define RELIGION, and why?
by Fernando in"judge" rutherford defined or classified all religion as "a snare and a racket" in his books "religion" and "enemies".. after rutherford's death in 1942, his protege, watchtower vice president, and aclu darling, hayden c. covington, in the early 1950's, for reasons of legal expedience and supremacist aspirations, suddenly converted the watchtower into a religion.. this was done alongside one of the most audacious, spurious and longstanding swindles of the us legal system.
this involved twisting philippians 1:7 and misrepresenting the watchtower's true nature, objectives and activities.. .
this meant that it became necessary for the watchtower to suddenly reclassify and redefine religion (w51 1/15 p. 43 new legal booklet well named; w51 8/15 p. 511 questions from readers; yb75 p. 161 part 2 "for gladys bolton...").. two new watchtower classifications were suddenly created: "true religion" and "false religion".. now "true religion" meant "true beliefs" whilst "belief" in ever changing watchtower doctrine was equated with the one "faith" of scripture.. all this while the watchtower increasingly and maliciously truncated, obfuscated and hid the liberating full "good news" (or unabridged gospel) of scripture, which it lyingly claimed (in court) that it was actually "defending and legally establishing".. how would you have defined religion before learning ttatt?.
-
-
TonusOH
"You know what I mean" is not an explanation. What do you mean when you speak of the information in a cell? Is it a complicated explanation? Is it confusing? Are you not sure what it means? It's an important starting point, if we are to understand the objection.
-
77
How would you define RELIGION, and why?
by Fernando in"judge" rutherford defined or classified all religion as "a snare and a racket" in his books "religion" and "enemies".. after rutherford's death in 1942, his protege, watchtower vice president, and aclu darling, hayden c. covington, in the early 1950's, for reasons of legal expedience and supremacist aspirations, suddenly converted the watchtower into a religion.. this was done alongside one of the most audacious, spurious and longstanding swindles of the us legal system.
this involved twisting philippians 1:7 and misrepresenting the watchtower's true nature, objectives and activities.. .
this meant that it became necessary for the watchtower to suddenly reclassify and redefine religion (w51 1/15 p. 43 new legal booklet well named; w51 8/15 p. 511 questions from readers; yb75 p. 161 part 2 "for gladys bolton...").. two new watchtower classifications were suddenly created: "true religion" and "false religion".. now "true religion" meant "true beliefs" whilst "belief" in ever changing watchtower doctrine was equated with the one "faith" of scripture.. all this while the watchtower increasingly and maliciously truncated, obfuscated and hid the liberating full "good news" (or unabridged gospel) of scripture, which it lyingly claimed (in court) that it was actually "defending and legally establishing".. how would you have defined religion before learning ttatt?.
-
-
TonusOH
Can anyone explain how the term "information" is applied with regards to biology, evolution, and/or genetics? The chatGPT quote above mentions that information theory is a branch of math and computer sciences. I am assuming that it isn't the same thing that is being referred to, when people talk about information in the cell.
What is information in the cell? How does that explain the apparent issue with how RNA could or could not replicate? For that matter, I guess we'd need a primer on what RNA is and how it works, or how it would work in a 'primordial' setting. Hell, I guess we'd need someone to explain that, too.
Quoting this stuff doesn't seem to be getting us any closer to understanding it. Is there someone who really understands it, and can explain it so us lay-people can see where the issue is?
-
3069
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
TonusOH
Lloyd is probably frustrated at the slow pace at which Croatia is adopting English as its official language. Don't they care about his mental health?
-
77
How would you define RELIGION, and why?
by Fernando in"judge" rutherford defined or classified all religion as "a snare and a racket" in his books "religion" and "enemies".. after rutherford's death in 1942, his protege, watchtower vice president, and aclu darling, hayden c. covington, in the early 1950's, for reasons of legal expedience and supremacist aspirations, suddenly converted the watchtower into a religion.. this was done alongside one of the most audacious, spurious and longstanding swindles of the us legal system.
this involved twisting philippians 1:7 and misrepresenting the watchtower's true nature, objectives and activities.. .
this meant that it became necessary for the watchtower to suddenly reclassify and redefine religion (w51 1/15 p. 43 new legal booklet well named; w51 8/15 p. 511 questions from readers; yb75 p. 161 part 2 "for gladys bolton...").. two new watchtower classifications were suddenly created: "true religion" and "false religion".. now "true religion" meant "true beliefs" whilst "belief" in ever changing watchtower doctrine was equated with the one "faith" of scripture.. all this while the watchtower increasingly and maliciously truncated, obfuscated and hid the liberating full "good news" (or unabridged gospel) of scripture, which it lyingly claimed (in court) that it was actually "defending and legally establishing".. how would you have defined religion before learning ttatt?.
-
-
TonusOH
@Sea Breeze: A lot of people notice how evolutionists start the evolution story with Life already existing.
The theory of evolution requires life to exist, since it is meant to describe the systems through which life diversifies. It is not meant to address the origins of life, which is a separate field of research (abiogenesis).
-
6
Oh noooooo! My favorite Youtubers turn out to be JW's.
by HappyDad inon the subject of beards....i recently realized that the people in three of the youtube channels i love to watch are jw's.
i don;t want to name these channels here, but you can message me if you want to know them.
shortly after the announcement of now being allowed to have a beard, the men on these youtube channels started growing facial hair, whereas until that point, they were clean shaven.
-
-
TonusOH
Imagine making free will an important part of your teachings... then forbidding people to grow a beard.
-
3069
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
TonusOH
I'm guessing that most exJW YouTubers aren't making a living from it. While Evans may make it seem that it's a full-time job requiring a corporate entity and multiple employees, most people make YouTube videos in their spare time and earn money working a normal job or career. Is there any other exJW whose primary/sole source of income is YT videos?
In any case, you can make videos about the WTS without being a "professional activist." You don't even have to be an activist at all. Chris Stuckman makes videos about movies and movie-making, which is his passion. He also made a video about his past as a JW and how it impacted his life. A good video, IMO. He's not an activist. I bet there are others.
Remember that Evans explained that, without enough money to earn a living, he would not make exJW content. I would even say that his message was that he wouldn't make content if he wasn't earning a comfortable living from it. His primary concern is making money from exJW/antiWTS videos. He is not shy about making this clear. If his earnings keep dropping, so will his output.
Want him to save the world? Send him money. Lots of it. And don't you dare tell him how he should spend it!
-
77
How would you define RELIGION, and why?
by Fernando in"judge" rutherford defined or classified all religion as "a snare and a racket" in his books "religion" and "enemies".. after rutherford's death in 1942, his protege, watchtower vice president, and aclu darling, hayden c. covington, in the early 1950's, for reasons of legal expedience and supremacist aspirations, suddenly converted the watchtower into a religion.. this was done alongside one of the most audacious, spurious and longstanding swindles of the us legal system.
this involved twisting philippians 1:7 and misrepresenting the watchtower's true nature, objectives and activities.. .
this meant that it became necessary for the watchtower to suddenly reclassify and redefine religion (w51 1/15 p. 43 new legal booklet well named; w51 8/15 p. 511 questions from readers; yb75 p. 161 part 2 "for gladys bolton...").. two new watchtower classifications were suddenly created: "true religion" and "false religion".. now "true religion" meant "true beliefs" whilst "belief" in ever changing watchtower doctrine was equated with the one "faith" of scripture.. all this while the watchtower increasingly and maliciously truncated, obfuscated and hid the liberating full "good news" (or unabridged gospel) of scripture, which it lyingly claimed (in court) that it was actually "defending and legally establishing".. how would you have defined religion before learning ttatt?.
-
-
TonusOH
I agree that atheism is counterintuitive. Think about how long it took humanity to develop a structure for things like logic and reasoning that could work for more than just simple and immediate problem-solving. Even now, we are still mostly emotional beings. This is why I do not expect religion or spirituality to go away anytime soon (especially the latter).
Indeed, it is so hard-wired into our nature that atheism is treated by many as a religion, and not just by religious people as a way to create an equivalence. Many within the atheist community work hard to politicize it, which is just another form of tribalism. The fact that there is an atheist community is a humorous reminder of how trapped we are in that kind of behavior.
I doubt I'll live long enough to see whatever the next phase of religion will look like. My fear is that it will become less about spirituality and mysticism and more about political power and domination. We might actually long for the good old days, when religion was only mostly misused by power-hungry opportunists. But that seems to be one of the curses of humanity, that we embody the old saying that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
-
39
Faithful Slave Appointment: What are the assumptions of Watchtower Matthew 24:45-47 Eschatology?
by Vanderhoven7 intext: matthew 24:45-47.
45 “who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time?
46 it will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns.
-
-
TonusOH
If anything speaks to our gullibility, it's the way we accept "it happened invisibly" as an explanation for why something didn't happen, after it was predicted to.
"This thing you were expecting didn't happen."
"Oh, it did happen! It's just that no one saw it."
"Works for me!"
-
77
How would you define RELIGION, and why?
by Fernando in"judge" rutherford defined or classified all religion as "a snare and a racket" in his books "religion" and "enemies".. after rutherford's death in 1942, his protege, watchtower vice president, and aclu darling, hayden c. covington, in the early 1950's, for reasons of legal expedience and supremacist aspirations, suddenly converted the watchtower into a religion.. this was done alongside one of the most audacious, spurious and longstanding swindles of the us legal system.
this involved twisting philippians 1:7 and misrepresenting the watchtower's true nature, objectives and activities.. .
this meant that it became necessary for the watchtower to suddenly reclassify and redefine religion (w51 1/15 p. 43 new legal booklet well named; w51 8/15 p. 511 questions from readers; yb75 p. 161 part 2 "for gladys bolton...").. two new watchtower classifications were suddenly created: "true religion" and "false religion".. now "true religion" meant "true beliefs" whilst "belief" in ever changing watchtower doctrine was equated with the one "faith" of scripture.. all this while the watchtower increasingly and maliciously truncated, obfuscated and hid the liberating full "good news" (or unabridged gospel) of scripture, which it lyingly claimed (in court) that it was actually "defending and legally establishing".. how would you have defined religion before learning ttatt?.
-
-
TonusOH
Fernando: Two new Watchtower classifications were suddenly created: "true religion" and "false religion".
WTS did not create those categories; they were always part of religion. Every religion considers itself the true religion, which means the others must be false. The WTS emphasized it because Rutherford seemed to revel in being a contrarian (and an asshole).
As for how to define religion... Google the word and you'll get a whole bunch of different answers. No one seems to know for sure how to define it. I think it's just another form of tribalism, a way in which humans form us/them groups to foster a sense of belonging and to build strong social bonds (the irony being that those bonds come at the expense of enmity with 'them').
These groups form organically because they are so intrinsic to how our minds work. And we join them almost by force of habit. We 'belong' to groups based on ethnicity, nationality, geographic location, color of our skin, color of our hair, dominant hand, favorite sports teams, and so on. Religion and government are the ultimate forms of this behavior, as they can justify the most extreme acts taken in their 'defense'. Human history is an ongoing effort to mitigate the dangers of both, a battle we seem to be winning, albeit very slowly.