Posts by Saename

7

The Kingdom—100 Years of Freemasonic Propaganda

by jwdoctrine in

the kingdom—100 years of freemasonic propaganda.

.

new post on http://jwdoctrine.com/the-kingdom-100-years-of-freemasonic-propaganda/ now connects pinky rings ,freemasonry and symbolism .....

Saename

LostGeneration, I understand your frustration. I don't quite get it either.

I don't get it especially because I'm a skeptic. I don't believe in things just because someone tells me what happened. Especially when it comes to history, a subject I like to learn about. I was never able to find (relatively) unbiased and reliable sources to confirm or disconfirm the hypothesis that Russel created the Watchtower that was allegedly linked to the Freemasons.

I am no Watchtower sympathizer, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna believe every single statement against the Watchtower.

20

How did all these civilizations survive the flood?

by losthobbit in

flood 2304 bc (http://creation.com/the-date-of-noahs-flood).

neolithic 8500-1500 bc (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/list_of_neolithic_cultures_of_china).

egyption dynasty 4 2613 to 2494 bc, dynasty 5: 2494 to 2345 bc, dynasty 6: 2345 - 2181 bc (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/list_of_ancient_egyptian_dynasties).

Saename

James Mixon - Gen. 6:4 and Numbers 13:33 is a big problem for believers.

I would have to disagree. I am no Christian apologist as I am an atheist, and I in no way believe in an inerrant Bible. So keep that in mind as you will be reading this post.

Having that said, I don't think Gen. 6.4 and Num 13.33 are a contradiction. I mean, Genesis does say that the Nephilim died after the flood, and in Numbers 13 we do have a reference to those Nephilim as if they were still alive. However, keep in mind who mentions those Nephilim. To me, it seems that it was a purposeful lie on the part of the speakers (the spies who went off to the land with Caleb) to scare the Israelites so that they would not attempt to wage war against the Canaanites (and other nations.)

I mean, of course, I don't believe this even happened. I don't believe any of it is historical as we have evidence that the Israelites settled in the land of Canaan rather peacefully—without as many conflicts as the Old Testament "testifies." However, what I mean is that I don't think the author of Numbers made a contradiction. I believe the author of Numbers, when he was making up that story, mentioned the Nephilim purposefully, knowing that they were already dead in this fantasy world. I think that whoever wrote Numbers—and, no, it was not Moses—just wanted to add some drama into the story. So, as a result, we have spies who are deliberately lying to Moses and his people.

But let me highlight one thing again. I am an atheist, and I don't believe this account is even an actual historical fact. I'm just analysing it as I would a novel or any other creative piece of writing. It seems to me to be too obvious to actually consider it a contradiction.

20

How did all these civilizations survive the flood?

by losthobbit in

flood 2304 bc (http://creation.com/the-date-of-noahs-flood).

neolithic 8500-1500 bc (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/list_of_neolithic_cultures_of_china).

egyption dynasty 4 2613 to 2494 bc, dynasty 5: 2494 to 2345 bc, dynasty 6: 2345 - 2181 bc (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/list_of_ancient_egyptian_dynasties).

Saename

Well, there obviously was no global flood. All evidence is completely against such notion.

However, there are theories that some flood may have occurred long, long time ago. This would explain why we have stories about floods coming from different cultures that didn't have contact with each other prior to globalization.

Nonetheless, keep in mind that if said flood ever happened (not the Biblical flood obviously...), then it would have been of a lesser magnitude than those tales would have us believe. Much lesser magnitude, in fact.

31

Why JW's Rave So Much About Conventions

by freemindfade in

"it was so beautiful, we are truly blessed!

now, they also plaster these affirmations all over social media, "this is the best life", “so blessed”, “best convention”.. why the gushing?

have you ever heard anyone say, “mmmm it was ok”?

Saename

Well, if any Jehovah's Witness said something bad about a convention, or the Watchtower, or the Governing Body, s/he would be labelled as an apostate. It's as simple as that. Surely, they can say, "It was okay." However, if anybody hears him say that, what will the elders think? What will the congregation think? They will all think that this person is spiritually weak. Accordingly, what are Jehovah's Witnesses encouraged not to do? They are encouraged not to associate with people who are spiritually weak. Worse yet, if anybody is seen as an apostate, s/he will have to meet with the elders who will arrange a Judicial Committee. A possible decision that could be made as a result of such meeting is disfellowshipping. Any Jehovah's Witness who is disfellowshipped must be shunned by other active Jehovah's Witnesses.

No Jehovah's Witness would recognize this; however, I believe it is always fear-induced speech whenever a person says how good a meeting was. (Did you notice that Jehovah's Witnesses say the exact same thing about meetings?) Of course, it is not a conscious fear; rather, it happens on an unconscious level. It is continuously repeated to Jehovah's Witnesses that if they reject the organisation, and such would include saying anything bad about the organisation, they are in effect rejecting God himself who allegedly appointed said organisation. As a result, they are in fear—unconsciously, I would argue nonetheless—that they can lose their opportunity of living forever in the Paradise Earth.

Of course, it does not always happen like that. The thoughts I'm sharing with you are rather simplistic and do not necessarily reflect each though pattern within the Jehovah's Witness members. Human minds are unquestionably complex, and I would argue that, at times, such unconscious fear plays a lesser role within the Jehovah's Witness pattern of thinking.

245

Is the Watchtower shy about repeating their new "generation" teaching?

by slimboyfat in

jw
friends

as i recall in the 1980s talks and watchtower literature, magazines and books were always talking about the "generation" teaching and how it proved armageddon was going to come any day now.. but am i correct in thinking they have only actually mentioned the new "overlapping generations" teaching once or twice in the literature?

why are they so shy about talking about their great new interpretation?

it's almost enough to make you suspect they are a embarrassed about it.. mention it once or twice, don't dwell on it, hope everyone just accepts it, and don't bring it up again.

Saename

I, being an unbaptized Jehovah's Witness publisher, have never even heard of the "overlapping generation" teaching. Nobody has ever told me about it. I found out about this absurd teaching when I started reading apostate websites around two weeks ago.

Jehovah's Witnesses wanted me to get baptized. And guess what... I didn't even know about those absurd teachings because nobody has ever told me about them. And then, if I were baptized, and if I found out about those types of teachings after getting baptized, they would tell me that one of the questions to get baptized was whether I did my research about the Jehovah's Witness religion (read: cult), and whether I have come to the conclusion that Jehovah's Witnesses are the only right religion (read: cult) based on that research. Based on my potential answer to that sneaky question, I would not be able to get a sort of annulment of my baptism, and thus I would be shunned if I were ever disassociated or disfellowshipped.

I am so glad I learned of this absurd teaching before getting baptized. Today, I happily recognize myself as one of Jehovah's Witness apostates preaching the good news. I am proud of being an apostate. I am proud of being an apostate because I preach the real good news—namely that Jehovah's Witnesses are a cult. (Don't worry; my "good news" is not a religious teaching. I am not religiously devoted at all and do actually recognize myself as an atheist. I'm just making fun of Jehovah's Witnesses.)

406

Goodbye JWD/JWN (my last post)

by slimboyfat in

jw
friends

after some considerable thought i have decided that i will no longer post on this forum because i want to return to jehovah.

thank you for all the kindness and many interesting discussions over the years.

i wish you all well in the future and the decisions you make.

Saename

I just read the first page and this one, page 19... I didn't want to go through all those posts.

So.. er.. I don't get it... Did you go back or not? Looking at your other posts, you seem to be as much of an apostate as all of us. You're still an apostate preaching the good news, are you not?

18

If you live in England . . .

by compound complex in

jw
friends

would a jehovah's witness ask you, the householder, "does christ dwell in this home?".

i have recently viewed the lady in the van, which was filmed principally in north london.

i am currently reviewing a transcript of alan bennett's play of the same title, looking for the exact quotation (the above may not be verbatim).. also, in the movie's subtitles, the word "curb" is spelled "kerb" in the original transcript.

Saename

WHAT!??!?!?

In the UK, you spell the word "fulfil" instead of "fulfill"? Oh no... NO.... THAT CANNOT BE TRUE.....

I loved the British accent. I loved the British variations of spelling (such as "colour" and "realise"), but I cannot... I cannot... stand this. I cannot deal with "fulfil." This is just outrageous.

This is how I feel now about trying to learn about the UK...

89

Need advice

by Drwho in

i'm a middle aged man.

i dated a jw lady for 3 months ., we never had sex, just made out , half naked , well everything except underwear .

she has been a jw for 40 years ., was married to a jw but he committed adultery 13 years ago so they divorced .

Saename

Note 2: I still have to say that I agree with dubstepped. I showed you those two videos above just for fun, if you wanted to make your goodbye with her feel like a knife stabbing her in the back. Sorry for the imagery, but that's how she'd view it, probably. I am actually surprised you're still trying to get her out. You started this thread around 20 days ago, and I just found it today because you updated it. Well, I gotta tell you, don't try anymore. Show her those two videos and say "Goodbye." That's it. I convinced myself that the organisation was lying. It wasn't somebody else. They showed me the information. But I convinced myself. You're not gonna convince her. Just tell her you are an apostate. An apostate preaching the good news. Show her the videos. And then say, "Goodbye." But regardless of what I said in my previous post, don't engage in any debates.

89

Need advice

by Drwho in

i'm a middle aged man.

i dated a jw lady for 3 months ., we never had sex, just made out , half naked , well everything except underwear .

she has been a jw for 40 years ., was married to a jw but he committed adultery 13 years ago so they divorced .

Saename

You want to dispel "what a [JW] says about God [using] the Watchtower"? Well, show her those two videos:

Stephen Lett says that the Watchtower has no problems with child sexual abuse and calls any allegations "apostate-driven lies and dishonesties":

Stephen Lett Says There Is No Problem with Child Sexual Abuse

Geoffrey Jackson, during the Australia Royal Commission, admits in court under oath that the Watchtower is, in fact, experiencing problems with child sexual abuse.

Geoffrey Jackson Admits There Is a Problem with Child Sexual Abuse

This should convince her (hopefully) that child sexual abuse allegations are not apostate lies, and that the Governing Body members lie to them when they say something different.

Note: If your girlfriend confronts you in regards to a question Geoffrey Jackson is asked in the second video, namely when he is asked, "And would you disagree then with anyone who said that the efforts to highlight and to deal with child sexual abuse in the Jehovah's Witness church is engaging in apostate lies?" Geoffrey Jackson does not say that child sexual abuse allegations are apostate lies. He is very ambiguous in his statement, that's for sure (and for a good reason—so that any JW watching this can say that child sexual abuse allegations are in fact apostate lies), but what he is denying is not child sexual abuse. He is denying other allegations that "apostates" make when they confront Jehovah's Witnesses regarding pedophilia. He, being a liar that he is (watch all the recordings from the Australia Royal Commission to see how he and the elders are attempting to dodge difficult questions and, in some cases, even lying about them), tries not to answer whether child sexual abuse allegations are apostate lies. (By the way, ambiguity is an actual logical fallacy; did you know?)

P.S. What did your girlfriend say exactly about apostates being like Adam and Eve? I have never heard that argument, and it doesn't really make sense to me... I mean, we are apostates, but we are apostates preaching the good news, are we not?

60

New Here ... Just woke up

by Sevan in

jw
friends

hey all, .

this is my first post.

i haven't been out in service or to a meeting in over a month.. i realize now that i've been having serious questions for years and many articles and talks have greatly disturbed me over the years.

Saename

The second link doesn't work for unknown-to-me reasons. Here it is, again:

Geoffrey Jackson Admits the Problem of Child Sexual Abuse within the Organisation

My apologies about that.