Posts by TonusOH

68

Are Atheists Hypocritical in Celebrating Christmas?

by Sea Breeze in

jw
friends

richard dawkins revealed that he celebrates christmas on radio four's today programme.. here is is quoted as saying: .

'i am perfectly happy on christmas day to say merry christmas to everybody,' dawkins said.

'i might sing christmas carols - once i was privileged to be invited to kings college, cambridge, for their christmas carols and loved it.

TonusOH

SeaBreeze: Do you think that they way your mind works would engender or inhibit trust from others?

Being skeptical and stripping away the obvious bias from arguments should engender trust from others, unless they're so deep into their beliefs that they refuse. For example, you again dodge the obvious issue that I brought up with your approach-- agreeing that any of these ancient people were real does nothing to corroborate any supernatural claims about them. So, let's ask all of these people who agree that Jesus existed-- how many of them believe he performed miracles? Was resurrected? Is god? How many among that group can prove any of those claims? Real proof, not 'it's right here in the Bible.' Misdirection is not an argument. It's dishonest. Why would I be concerned about trust from people who prefer that?

I think my approach is better than being so committed to an unprovable presupposition that I would dismiss, avoid, or ignore the very real problems with my beliefs. One reason I stopped believing is because I couldn't get anywhere once I dropped the assumptions and tried to make sense of it without them. In other words, for many years I didn't allow my mind to "function properly." Now I do. You think that the issue is with the JW way of thinking. I am saying that the issue is a framework that requires you to avoid critical thinking about problems that would undermine your beliefs.

4

Bible based faith peculiarities

by menrov in

looking back on what i accepted to believe at the time, i now realize how peculiar some of things were:.

- people talking to a snake.

- killer of brother, who was recognized for his great offer, walks free and protected.

TonusOH

Teddnzo: He probably said ok Eve bend over [...]

Okay, that made me laugh.

I don't think it's an issue that Genesis doesn't go into details on how Adam and Eve figured out sex. But it must have been something amazing or terrifying, given how obsessed Jehovah became with sex afterwards. You would think god would have come up with a way to make sex less appealing for non-married non-hetero couples, but he ends up with a system where all you need is a bit of friction. Not exactly an award-winning design.

66

My decision.

by MissDaSilva in

jw
friends

i’ve decided to disassociate from the jw organisation.

i cannot be part of a community that blatantly rejects the sacrifice of jesus in that demonic memorial ritual.

amazing what information you find when you start researching.. i’m writing my letter and posting it to the kingdom hall this morning.

TonusOH

MissDaSilva: I love God and accept Jesus as my Lord and Saviour.

The nice thing is that you can visit any number of Christian churches if you wish. Few of them will demand control over your life the way the WTS does. You'll be able to meet others and find new friends without the fear that you will have to build another fence around yourself. The WTS tries to instill a fear/hatred of all other denominations, which can make it difficult to try a new one. Don't let that stop you. Good luck!

68

Are Atheists Hypocritical in Celebrating Christmas?

by Sea Breeze in

jw
friends

richard dawkins revealed that he celebrates christmas on radio four's today programme.. here is is quoted as saying: .

'i am perfectly happy on christmas day to say merry christmas to everybody,' dawkins said.

'i might sing christmas carols - once i was privileged to be invited to kings college, cambridge, for their christmas carols and loved it.

TonusOH

SeaBreeze: The problem you have is that once you accept Jesus' historical existence, as have virtuall ALL historians, then you must accept some form of evidence for that belief.

Those historians are referring to what they call historical facts. The standards of evidence are significantly eased to account for how difficult it is (in many cases, impossible) to prove that someone existed. Historians understand that if a person meets a number of specific criteria, it is reasonable to accept that they probably existed. That's it. When someone claims to prove a claim about a historical figure, or claim that such is undeniable, they're lying.

In other words, one can create a list of 'minimal facts' for any number of ancient people, then try to use those to promote an unproven assertion about them. I bet that the same historians who accept that Jesus probably existed also consider it a historical fact that Vespasian existed. How many of those historians also believe that Vespasian cured a blind man with his spittle? My guess is none of them, because they recognize the dishonest switch being attempted.

I get the impression that you think that if I accept that Jesus was a real person, I am also obligated to believe that he was resurrected from the dead. By that same reasoning, I must accept that Vespasian cured blindness and that Muhammad traveled via flying horse. Whether I accept that they did or didn't exist has nothing to do with the supernatural claims attributed to them.

You can label me or speculate about my mental state, if you wish. But it doesn't address the problems with the links you posted, or the claims you're making, or the inferences you are trying to draw from insufficient data and a lack of real facts to go along with your historical facts.

3144

It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)

by Simon in

jw
friends

uh 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

Teddnzo: At what point will this be inevitable?

It depends on who continues to support him. He has tiers from $1 to $50 per month. If he had 100 patrons left, that is anywhere from $100 to $5000 per month. A quick Google search indicates that the average income in Croatia in 2022 was around $1,500/month. He'd need to get $15 from each patron, on average, to get that much each month.

Mind you, this does not take into account his wife and children. I don't know if there are laws regarding support for them in Croatia, and if there are I don't know if his wife has filed for such. That could increase his monthly expenses by quite a bit. It also doesn't take into account his inability to master his penis, which could lead to additional monthly expenses of a different kind.

But it might boil down to this: how many of his supporters are willing to pay $10-15 per month regardless of what happens? And for how long? I think he could milk this for quite a long time, though there is one other potential problem: his penchant for blowing up everything he touches. How long before he finds new ways to antagonize the few remaining die-hards?

109

Why disfellowship must be eliminated for the survival of the WT itself

by TheScientist in

this topic i digress about why the watchtower relaxing the rules of disfellowship is essential for its survival.

many things i'm going to say are not my ideas, some are, the point is, i'm condensing everything in a logical and concise way.. the first thing we have to keep in mind is that the wt's main objective in instituting disfellowship has always been not to lose members because of the damage that a dissident could do, or to avoid gaining new members because of the bad reputation of a confessed sinner in the his/her region.

in the end, the more active members, the more money to the coffers.. in this case of disfellowship due to apostasy, to avoid any spark, texts were sought out of context that even prohibited saying "hi".

TonusOH

They could ease a lot of rules by going in the other direction in response to the idea that the end is almost on us. Traditionally, they pushed the idea that it was necessary to be as focused and self-disciplined as possible, so that the end found us on our best behavior. But why not push the idea of Jehovah as merciful and desirous of everyone being saved, through the relaxing of the rules and expectations? More people stay in and have the opporunity to accept salvation when the day of judgment arrives. The rank and file could have a more normal home life, with less stress.

The constant pressure and anxiety of waiting for the end of the world eventually becomes overwhelming when the end doesn't actually come. I don't think it's any surprise that people get worn out, leave, and realize that there is a better life outside of the organiztion. Ease the pressure and you might keep a lot of those people from leaving.

68

Are Atheists Hypocritical in Celebrating Christmas?

by Sea Breeze in

jw
friends

richard dawkins revealed that he celebrates christmas on radio four's today programme.. here is is quoted as saying: .

'i am perfectly happy on christmas day to say merry christmas to everybody,' dawkins said.

'i might sing christmas carols - once i was privileged to be invited to kings college, cambridge, for their christmas carols and loved it.

TonusOH

SeaBreeze: The consensus among most all scholars who publish in this area are several facts surrounding he Resurrection of Jesus.

You are linking to an article titled "Twelve Undeniable Facts That Prove The Resurrection." Is this what "most all scholars" in this field accept as a standard of evidence? An article that attempts to use the Bible --and only the Bible-- to corroborate claims from the Bible?

You mention Habermas's 'minimal facts approach.' Most of those are also claims which have not been corroborated. But let's accept his claims for a moment: we end up with a man named Jesus who preached and built up a following and who was executed by the Romans. His followers then claimed that they saw him alive after his death. The "most all scholars" you refer to accept that his followers made this claim- they do not accept that those claims are true.

As for Ehrman: you don't think Ehrman is claiming that Jesus was resurrected, do you? He accepts that the Biblical character is based on a real person, not that this person did anything aside from what any other normal human could do. I neither accept nor deny that a preacher named Jesus might be the actual inspiration for the Bible character. I am pointing out that your claims regarding his divinity are just that: claims, not facts. I am pointing out that your evidentiary standard for these claims is very low, and this hurts your case.

I'll let a Christian explain just a few of the problems with Habermas's approach:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY8NnBSAqbM

5

In the spirit of Christmas

by no-zombie in

on this auspicious day, i'd like to propose a question (half in fun and the other half not) to ask, ... if the governing body reviewed the origins of christmas and now proclaimed that it was now a matter of conscience, how many of the brotherhood would pick it up and start practicing it?.

for me, i think that very, very few would take issue of the change and disassociate themselves.

yes, many would question it in their minds for a while but since it would be a governing body sanctioned holiday, i think a very surprising large number would do so with zeal ... particularly in europe, were it still has wholesome family traditions.

TonusOH

Jan: Like the GB doesn't really approve.

That is exactly what they want the rank and file to feel. It's a sort of "you can do that if you feel you need to, but Jehovah would be very proud of you if you didn't" attitude.

If they did say that Christmas celebrations were a conscience matter, a lot of JWs would still not celebrate it. My mother would not, I am certain of that. She would point to all of the old WTS teachings and lean on those. But overall, I think there would be a gradual shift towards celebrating. The issue for the GB is that it would likely cause rifts in many congregations, and lots of brothers and sisters would feel like they had been betrayed. If there isn't that much to differentiate the WTS from other Christian denominations, why not go to one of the others?

13

Door to Door Witnessing Anxiety

by NotFormer in

it's not only the jws who do door to door witnessing.

the independent baptists for the most part have "soul winning", mainly door to door witnessing and leaving tracts, as a tennet of their faith.

this discussion is interesting:.

TonusOH

In territory that was overworked, there definitely was stress when you went out in field service. You knocked on doors knowing that the people inside knew it was JWs, and knowing that they were probably quite tired of it. You hoped that the worst of it was just people saying "no thanks" and that was it.

The reporting requirements, and the pressure to post sufficient hours each month, made for a very unpleasant experience for both JWs and households that did not want to be bothered yet again by a knock at the door on a weekend morning. So it was both stressful and unrewarding. I don't recall any particular brothers or sisters who looked forward to it, but I can remember how happy we were when the hour or two was over.

3144

It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)

by Simon in

jw
friends

uh 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

Evans made a video before he entered the JC, explaining that he would not record it because he had nothing to hide, which makes zero sense. "I have nothing to hide" is the explanation you use for recording such a meeting. He claimed that his JC was for apostasy, an outcome that fits much better with his self-image as an exJW activist working to expose the organization. It certainly sounds better than, well...

In his book, he tells of the time that his wife found his phone with messages showing that he was 'sexting girls online.' He explains that this was not the first time she had discovered him doing so. He has other stories in his books which paint him as something of a perverted creep. One could easily imagine that the judicial committee wanted to learn more about what he would later term his inability to master his penis. Alas, we can't ever know for certain because he refused to record it. But which one sounds more plausible?