I was under the impression that the teaching that the UN is the disgusting thing causing desolation had be changed fairly recently. This came from a JW. I don't have access to Watchtowers after 1997. Any clarification on this?
Thanks,
T.
Trilobite
JoinedPosts by Trilobite
-
18
Question on Teaching UN is Beast to recruits?
by hawkaw inquestion to you intelligent jws and exjws.. does the wt, through its knowledge book or whatever, make sure new recruits know who the scarlet coloured wild beast is or disgusting thing is (ie, the un), who is part of the great harlot etc before becoming full blown jws?.
like should new recruits know this off by heart thanks to the rote teaching?.
hawk
-
-
-
7
WT/UN References-Dan. Creator. Proc. Rev.
by messenger inbelow are the references made to the un from four wt publications.
it is interesting how anyone who had any association with the un were completely condemned to destruction by wt.
this is too funny..... .
-
-
Trilobite
Hawk,
Good work. I noticed this on the page at http://www.un.org/MoreInfo/ngolink/brochure.htm. <aybethi shas been noted. It would be interesting to discover what materials the WTS has sent to the UN.
"In addition, they are expected to keep the DPI/NGO Section abreast of their activities by regularly providing samples of their information materials relating to the work of the UN. These are also made available for perusal at the DPI/NGO Resource Centre."
T.
-
12
Watchtower DESTROYS U. S. Capitol Building
by Tallyman inthis is the united states capitol building getting zapped.. is this a depiction of anti-americanism?.
for a larger context of this picture .
of destruction .
-
-
Trilobite
Tally,
Good post and all that. But "Anti-Americanism" is in and of itself an expression which should repulse all those who embrace ideals of freedom, free speech and freedom of religion.
T.
-
39
'Lost' redux
by Rex B13 inbeing lost...is of course, the usual state of things here.
what's surprising is that they (the lost) think that pulling scriptures out of context, isolating mosaic laws mean't for one purpose and one time, is somehow refuting scripture.. they like to ignore the fact that jesus is the revealed yahweh and he sets the mark, not any organisation nor any pious individual.
we relate scripture to him and we interpret scripture by his life amongst mankind.
-
-
Trilobite
Rex,
> All of you have a problem with me.
Not at all. Presumably, the reason for the existence of a discussion board is to discuss. If you don't like it then don't post and you'd be forgotten. But, by all means keep on posting. That way your idiocy, and that of your ilk, is exposed continually.
> I remind you that you have a secret fear in your hearts; that fear is that 'Christendom was right all along'.
What a silly assumption. It may make you feel good but that's about it. The reason for any antipathy to your ideas is not that you _might_ be right but the certainty, even based on NT standards, that you are wrong. More particularly it is the sad fact that dysfunctional fundamentalists such as yourself can cause much damage. Witness the WTS and recent happenings at the WTC. In another arean, your basic views of women differ little from those of the Taleban.
> I hold a mirror up to your own hypocrisy.
You're the hypocrite. There are certain well defined scientific principles which you continually misrepresent so as to further your own agenda. In themselves these scientific principles are "God neutral" and yet you conscript them and twist them to push your selfish faulty views. The 2nd Law of thermodynamics is one example. Yet, you claim to be a propoent of truth. This is documentable hypocrisy. Care to document our hypocrisy?
>I refuse to be cowered by grandiose misrepresentations.
Easy to say on an internet discussion board. Big talk from a small mind.
> I refuse to be shut up by bellicose attacks and insults.You indulge in bellicose attacks and insults when you are unable to answer cogent arguments based on documented facts. And that is pretty much all the time. Proof? Let's see how/if you answer this post and my challenge to you to explain the 2nd Law.
> I defend the faith aggressively and yes, true to my humanity, I am very imperfect and really no better than anyone else.
A lot worse than many. You're a liar, albeit an accidental one beacuse you are so carried away with your religious fanaticsm.
> I am earnest and sincere.
What is this, a job application?
> I stand for my faith and attack those who would propagate slander and lies about those who are simply living their faith.and working to impose that faith on others, by force of law if they can.
> I would do anything for any individual in need, including those whom I argue with here every day.
I believe that. The problem, Rex, is that "anything" might include being reasonable, as opposed to being dogmatic. In a sense you are like Martha. Very ready to aid physically. Spiritual things, often in a nonreligious sense, are more imprtant. However, maybe there is more to you than meets the eye.
> The biggest lie propagated here is the contention that Christianity has no valid teachings and there is no difference between Christ's life, His example and the various false teachings in the world.
You are welcome to believe that. I don't say that Christianity has no valid teachings. In fact, I think that many Christians have valid teachings, as do members of other religions. In reality, Fundamentalist Christianity is quite a distortion from most past and modern versions of Christianity, although in different ways. Ultimately it is destructive because it abhorrs thought, as does the WTS. What makes you such an expert on religion, having already been fooled once?
> Atheistic Liberals
What are you, a Christian or a politician? Atheism has nothing to to with liberalism. I understand your mistake, however, which is based on the following; atheism and liberalism both spring from education. However, they are not the same thing and are often not even related. For the record I'm not an atheist. But I do understand why you misunderstand both things. Actually I'm not much of a liberal either. Both tags are convenient ways to label what you don't understand. It i seasy to paint someone who has serious scientifically based concerns about the environment as a "liberal" but it is as really stupid thing to do. For example, I'll bet you can't explain what the Ozone hole is or why it exists. So you deride those who have looked into it as being "atheistic liberals."
>love to claim that Christians who will not knuckle under to their assertions are somehow violating their own beliefs.
You _are_ violating your own beliefs to make your world view work. You seem to be a rabid conservative proponent of American ideals who has stated that the Golden Rule does not apply when it comes to politics, i.e., American values and the projection of American values overseas. That's fine but it sure as hell isn't Christian. For example, what is the Christian basis for backing Israel?
>HOGWASH.
Self portrait?
> This site takes up only a few hours of my time
He protest'th too much. What is it Rex, lay the soul bare time? Who gives a tuppeny damn how long you spend here? It's what you say that counts.
> and it has resulted in people getting to know me by e-mail and some have been turned back from the pit that everyone here dances on the edge of with uncaring glee.
I understand that think that you are the "great white hope" but forget it. Many of us want to do what we can in this life without judging people on their beliefs or lifestyles. If God wants to screw us for that then that is our call, and His call, not yours. You do seem to be on the verge of a Messianic complex. Historically that condition has rarely worked out well.
T.
-
41
Is evolution a fact or theory?
by sleepy inis evolution a fact or a theory?.
i suppose it depends on what you mean.. evolution in the sense of change from one generation to the next seams to be fact.. is well observed that offspring from a given creature will differ from the parent in different ways and thus after many generation can come to be quite different.. also that the genes of a creature can be affected by radiation from the sun and be alter in a novel way producing new and unique features in its offspring ( as long as the mutation is in the sperm or the egg).. that we came about via changes in the genes that eventually created a very different creature than that existed many generations ago , is that a fact?.
this requires that not only that there are changes between generation but also that these changes could be directed by different environments to such a degree that only certain specialised features could survive and reproduce offspring whilst other creatures have died out and only remain in fossilised form.. what evidence is there that such environments can and have existed?
-
-
Trilobite
sleepy,
You raise a good question. However, first it is probably a good idea to understand what a "theory" is as opposed to a "fact" in a general sense. For most, evolution is a too emotionally charged topic to understand the distinction. So, what I'd suggest is that you look into the meaning of "theory" versus "fact" in a less highly charged arena. For example, is gravity a theory or a fact? Obviously most scientists have no ulterior theological motives when it comes to gravity. Therefore, once the understaning of "theory" vs. "fact" has been arrived at, in the contect of gravity, the concepts can be transferred directly to evolution.
It is a rather illuminating exercise.
T.
-
39
'Lost' redux
by Rex B13 inbeing lost...is of course, the usual state of things here.
what's surprising is that they (the lost) think that pulling scriptures out of context, isolating mosaic laws mean't for one purpose and one time, is somehow refuting scripture.. they like to ignore the fact that jesus is the revealed yahweh and he sets the mark, not any organisation nor any pious individual.
we relate scripture to him and we interpret scripture by his life amongst mankind.
-
-
Trilobite
Farkel,
: Ah, but you and I have an iota of intelligence, don't we?
You do. Not entirely sure about me.
: Were not our own attitudes dangerous for much or most of our lives?
Possibly, but not to others. Rex, as an indivual, is probably not dangerous, mainly because he's an idiot. However, the summation of large numbers of nutcases like Rex can produce problems. It is much the same phoenomenon as with cockroaches. Rex occasionally displays his human side. But who doesn't?
I should know; we Trilobites, arguably one of the most diverse and adaptive of God's creations, were sentenced to the junk pile of history, partly because the Grand Designer gave in to the incessant rant of the insects. Nothing changes.
T.
-
39
'Lost' redux
by Rex B13 inbeing lost...is of course, the usual state of things here.
what's surprising is that they (the lost) think that pulling scriptures out of context, isolating mosaic laws mean't for one purpose and one time, is somehow refuting scripture.. they like to ignore the fact that jesus is the revealed yahweh and he sets the mark, not any organisation nor any pious individual.
we relate scripture to him and we interpret scripture by his life amongst mankind.
-
-
Trilobite
Seeker,
You're entitled to your views, of course. Rex and I also go back, and I have had ample opportunity to observe his ignorance and his bigotism. Personally I have never considered ignorant fanatical bigots and liars to be "good men." These are exactly the kind of people who would actually kill others who oppose their world view, given the right circumstances, as we know all to well. Had Rex an iota of intelligence, or the opportunity, then his attitudes would be dangerous. Anyone who argues that the Golden Rule doesn't work when it comes to nations is endorsing the kinds of actions engaged in by terrorists who are merely waging war in an asymmetric environment. If the tables were turned Rex would, no doubt, do the same thing. In fact, I would be surprised if this sterling, born again "Christian" would not endorse the use of nuclear weapons against innocent civilians so as to preserve his twisted ideals.
There are is real evil in this world and it manifests itself initially in attitudes. This bozo, this "good man", exhibits these attitudes in rich measure.
-
39
'Lost' redux
by Rex B13 inbeing lost...is of course, the usual state of things here.
what's surprising is that they (the lost) think that pulling scriptures out of context, isolating mosaic laws mean't for one purpose and one time, is somehow refuting scripture.. they like to ignore the fact that jesus is the revealed yahweh and he sets the mark, not any organisation nor any pious individual.
we relate scripture to him and we interpret scripture by his life amongst mankind.
-
-
Trilobite
: Try taking a little survey of those who have the atheist/liberal world-view, common denominators are these causes;
: big goverment,
And just who is the head of the biggest government on the planet? An atheist? Name the last atheist president.
: abolishing religion from public places (ACLU),
Given the recent acts of fanatic religionists then that might not be a bad idea. However, no atheist would sanction that because most believe in free speech. Tell me Rex, how does some religious nut who bombs an abortion clinic differ from those who attacked the WTC? Apart from the notion that there god is evil and yours is good?
:extreme environmentalism,
Right. Let's kill the forests.
:socialism,
Let's kill the poor.
: feminism (not rights-man hating),
Let's abuse the women, and, if they don't do our bidding, as lesser vessels, why not kill them too. But we'll rape 'em first.
: abortions,
Let's save the foetii so they can grow up to be killers like us. Or, at best, let them grow up in poverty because we oppose sex education, or any real education if it comes to that.
: animal rights (our cousins!),
kill the aniamls too.
: evolution,
Kill thought.
: pacifism,
Kill Jesus teachings.
: no gun rights,
He who lives by the sword.
: against capital punishment
Kill the criminals too.
: and often anti-Americanism.
Kill everyone else.
Rex, isn't it about time that you checked yourself in? You really are a piece of shit.
T.
-
39
'Lost' redux
by Rex B13 inbeing lost...is of course, the usual state of things here.
what's surprising is that they (the lost) think that pulling scriptures out of context, isolating mosaic laws mean't for one purpose and one time, is somehow refuting scripture.. they like to ignore the fact that jesus is the revealed yahweh and he sets the mark, not any organisation nor any pious individual.
we relate scripture to him and we interpret scripture by his life amongst mankind.
-
-
Trilobite
I finally understand why God desires that some of his followers be martyrs. It wasn't to inspire others; it was to get idiots like Rex of his back.
-
41
I D Cards First Step Down Slippery Slope?
by Englishman inthe uk government has announced that it is very serious about making it compulsory for citizens to carry an id card in view of the risk of subversive activity increasing.
it seems to me that this is the thin edge of the wedge.
i spent years trying to get out of a repressive organisation, and then even more years getting that organisations brain-washing out of my head.
-
-
Trilobite
Seeker,
Rex is guided purely by his fanatical religious fervor. I wonder how he would feel if it were made illegal to protest outside abortion clinics? Certainly, one could make a valid case that rightwing religious nurtcases have engaged in terrorism against doctors and law abiding citizens seeking an abortion. Perhaps, for Rex, his ID card should have encoded "born again Christian, with anti-abortion tendencies" laminated into it. Then, if ever a clinic were attacked in Rex's vicinity, he could be hauled in and made to sit with all those big sweaty guys for a day or two. Of course, with half the administration being born-again then maybe not.
T.