Posts by 88JM

53

Why Did You Get Baptised

by God_Delusion in

hi guys,.

so then, why did you get dunked?

were you pressured into it too, or did you do it because you honestly thought it was the right thing to do?.

88JM

I was pretty much the same as irondork. Also my older brother got baptised at 15 so there was a bit of rivalry going on.

Looking back, I was even more naive than I realised. I got baptised not really knowing the WTBTS' views on:

The faithful and discreet slave - I really thought it was some big mystery and was never sure how it worked.
1975 - I had no idea what the WTBTS had done.
Apostates - The little that I had heard made me think they were all banner-waving, foaming-at-the-mouth loonies.
1914 - where the date came from or why 607 was important.
Disfellowshipping - I didn't know anyone that was disfellowshipped (it never happened in my congregations in my lifetime), so I didn't know what the "proceedure" was. I had never heard of Ray Franz or what happened in the 1980s.
Peadophiles and congregation proceedure.
Bethel - I had no idea all the crazy stuff that went on there until I visited a few of them and spoke to bethelites.
Armageddon - I never realised they were saying all non-JWs would be destroyed.
The flood - never saw all the problems with the account. Took it completely literally.
Humans on earth for 6,000 years - I thought cavemen and neanderthals were all the result of the "evils" of carbon-dating.
Contraditions in the bible, and deeply flawed "heroes" - never quite added up all the bad stuff about David, Lot etc.

18

Elders' Password For JW.Org

by tijkmo in

jw
friends

does anyone know anything about this ..i heard from family that all letters and latest arrangements are accessible to elders on jw.org but they need to have a password.

wondered if anyelders here could give us it...or will it identify someone?.

88JM

Just for your curiosity, the WTBTS also has a password policy for logging into jw.org - this is standard practice in I.T.

As a ministerial servant (who also have access, though more limited and not including BOE letters or congregation files) originally I chose the password "Genesis".

When I logged in the next time, the system informed me that this password was not allowed - presumably as it is an easy to guess word and very hackable. This would be considered a "weak password". I also tried Genesis typed backwards (sisineG) - this was also disallowed.

I was pretty much forced to choose a password that was not a word in the dictionary and also that it had to contain numbers as well as letters. I think the minimum length was 7 or 8 characters.

So for those of you thinking of trying to guess some passwords - which of course I would not endorse - then you should put down your Oxford English or Websters dictionary and start mashing the keyboard instead. Alternatively, if the phrase "rainbow tables" means anything to you, then you're way ahead anyway...

18

Elders' Password For JW.Org

by tijkmo in

jw
friends

does anyone know anything about this ..i heard from family that all letters and latest arrangements are accessible to elders on jw.org but they need to have a password.

wondered if anyelders here could give us it...or will it identify someone?.

88JM

Whoa whoa hang on. I think this needs clarifying as this statement could be misunderstood:

" ...it is possible for the WTBTS to record the page that a user left just before landing on their site "

The problem is with the phrase "just left", and whether your visit can be recorded or not depends on how you left the previous site. The key phrase here to remember here is "referring links".

Scenario:

If you visit one site then
Type the address of another site in the address bar of your browser then
The second site cannot tell what the previous site you visited was.

A website cannot read your entire browsing history of other sites (assuming you are using an up-to-date and secure browser).

However, what a website can do is read referring links, i.e.:

You click on a direct link to a jw.org on another website, e.g. jwfacts.com or whatever
jw.org can then determine that you were referred to their site by a link from another website, and yes - does also log the IP address of your computer - this is standard practice.
jw.org cannot tell what other pages on the previous site you visited, only the page that contained the link to jw.org.

If you wish to read further on what data is collected, Google Analytcs has comprehensive information: https://developers.google.com/analytics/resources/concepts/gaConceptsTrackingOverview

43

Markan priority and the synoptic gospels

by 88JM in

this might be a question for leolaia, but i noticed in researching the gospel of mark this week that the dates the wtbts gives for the writing of the other synoptic gospels does not seem to agree with most new testament scholars.. the all scripture book gives the following dates:.

matthew: writing completed: c. 41 c.e.mark: writing completed: c. 6065 c.e.luke: writing completed: c. 5658 c.e.this would put mark as the last of the three synoptic gospels to be written, and therefore the wtbts does not adhere to the markan priority hypothesis.. wikipedia states that: "the theory of markan priority is today accepted by the majority of new testament scholars".. .

is there a good reason why the wtbts dates the synoptic gospels in that order?how can they date matthew and luke so early?is it merely because the wtbts rejects the possibility of a "q" source, and possibly even the idea of collusion between the writers altogether?or is it because many scholars put the writings of luke and matthew after the destruction of jerusalem, meaning the "prophecies" of destruction became historical accounts of past events by the time they were written?

88JM

Thanks for the PDF transhuman68 - I've been looking forward to reading some Bart Ehrman. Will be reading this later

22

Leaps in Logic Reguarding The Faithful Slave of Matt:25:42-46 and The Governing Body Claim of Authority it Gives Them

by frankiespeakin in

do you see anything even remotely in these scripture that fore tell a future slave that would dominate the rest of the slaves with a publishing company?

.

42 therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your lord will come.43 but understand this: if the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into.44 so you also must be ready, because the son of man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.. 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..

88JM

If you go by their new light, they are basically implying that these verses are written only about 8 senile, bumbling, balding old guys lounging around in leather office chairs, sipping coffee around a cheap laminated, oversized boardroom table, inside the office building of an international book publishing cult in Brooklyn and that's all it applies to, nothing more.

They're seriously trying to say that's exactly the picture Jesus had mind? If that isn't megalomania then I don't know what is.

34

The Bible and Masturbation...4000 years of inspired input and no scriptures about it ?

by smiddy in

my philosophy when i was a teenager :"those who admit to it are stupid ,those who deny it are liars" that was my response to peers who posed such a subject when i was a teen .now, being a mature aged person i think this subject could do with a bit more enlightened content.. i am a male so i can`t speak for the females ,who, i hope will give their input on this topic for discussion.and i mean it as a serious discussion.. males experience erections from the time they are babies and the natural thing to do is to hold it , and before you know it fondling it gives you releif.. society doesnt help by making you feel guilty and like shit as a dirty person.why in the world do babes ,young children ,young boys get erections before they even know what it`s function is for.

if a god designed sex for procreation then surely this wouldnt become an issue until they reached the age of puberty ,not when a male is still a baby.. and getting back to my op nowhere in the bible does it talk about masturbation which surely has been going on since adam was a boy/man.. i`m sorry, but to deny that you would have to be a complete idiot ,imbecile ,fool ,or just brain dead.. so for 4000 years of inspired scriptures from god ,nothing is said about a condition that effects every man from his birth to his death .. makes you wonder doesn`t it ?.

smiddy.

88JM

Apognophos - indeed they do not use the Onan account to support their argument - they actually address it in a footnote in the Young People Ask book, page 201. The footnote is in referance to their statement: "Masturbation is not mentioned at all in the Bible."

leaving_quietly - I have far too much free time on my hands - I think I should be using it to masturbate rather than study.

43

Markan priority and the synoptic gospels

by 88JM in

this might be a question for leolaia, but i noticed in researching the gospel of mark this week that the dates the wtbts gives for the writing of the other synoptic gospels does not seem to agree with most new testament scholars.. the all scripture book gives the following dates:.

matthew: writing completed: c. 41 c.e.mark: writing completed: c. 6065 c.e.luke: writing completed: c. 5658 c.e.this would put mark as the last of the three synoptic gospels to be written, and therefore the wtbts does not adhere to the markan priority hypothesis.. wikipedia states that: "the theory of markan priority is today accepted by the majority of new testament scholars".. .

is there a good reason why the wtbts dates the synoptic gospels in that order?how can they date matthew and luke so early?is it merely because the wtbts rejects the possibility of a "q" source, and possibly even the idea of collusion between the writers altogether?or is it because many scholars put the writings of luke and matthew after the destruction of jerusalem, meaning the "prophecies" of destruction became historical accounts of past events by the time they were written?

88JM

breakfast of champions - the reasons for the dates are given in the insight book - I will try and post them later if I can.

Dating of Matthew from the Insight book: Subscriptions, appearing at the end of Matthew’s Gospel in numerous manuscripts (all being later than the tenth century C.E.), say that the account was written about the eighth year after Christ’s ascension (c. 41 C.E.). This would not be at variance with internal evidence. The fact that no reference is made to the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy respecting Jerusalem’s destruction would point to a time of composition prior to 70 C.E. (Mt 5:35; 24:16) And the expression “to this very day” (27:8; 28:15) indicates a lapse of some time between the events considered and the time of writing.
Dating of Luke from the Insight book: It was evidently before writing the book of Acts that Luke completed his Gospel. (Ac 1:1, 2) Since he had accompanied Paul to Jerusalem at the end of the apostle’s third missionary journey (Ac 21:15-17), he would have been in a good position to trace accurately the things pertaining to Jesus Christ in the very land where the Son of God had carried out his activity. Following Paul’s arrest at Jerusalem and during Paul’s later imprisonment in Caesarea, Luke would have had many opportunities to interview eyewitnesses and to consult written records. So it is reasonable to conclude that the Gospel may have been written at Caesarea sometime during Paul’s confinement there for about two years (c. 56-58 C.E.).—Ac 21:30-33; 23:26-35; 24:27.

Guys, I acknowledge your discussion around Mark's gospel, but the dating of Mark seems to be one thing that the WTBTS and scholars agree on. It's the dating of the other books that is the problem - the WTBTS seems determined to place those gospels before Mark's.

34

The Bible and Masturbation...4000 years of inspired input and no scriptures about it ?

by smiddy in

my philosophy when i was a teenager :"those who admit to it are stupid ,those who deny it are liars" that was my response to peers who posed such a subject when i was a teen .now, being a mature aged person i think this subject could do with a bit more enlightened content.. i am a male so i can`t speak for the females ,who, i hope will give their input on this topic for discussion.and i mean it as a serious discussion.. males experience erections from the time they are babies and the natural thing to do is to hold it , and before you know it fondling it gives you releif.. society doesnt help by making you feel guilty and like shit as a dirty person.why in the world do babes ,young children ,young boys get erections before they even know what it`s function is for.

if a god designed sex for procreation then surely this wouldnt become an issue until they reached the age of puberty ,not when a male is still a baby.. and getting back to my op nowhere in the bible does it talk about masturbation which surely has been going on since adam was a boy/man.. i`m sorry, but to deny that you would have to be a complete idiot ,imbecile ,fool ,or just brain dead.. so for 4000 years of inspired scriptures from god ,nothing is said about a condition that effects every man from his birth to his death .. makes you wonder doesn`t it ?.

smiddy.

88JM

The YPA book still borrowed a lot from the earlier "Youth" book, and in some ways could be considered a watered down post-Knorr version.

From 1976:

34

The Bible and Masturbation...4000 years of inspired input and no scriptures about it ?

by smiddy in

my philosophy when i was a teenager :"those who admit to it are stupid ,those who deny it are liars" that was my response to peers who posed such a subject when i was a teen .now, being a mature aged person i think this subject could do with a bit more enlightened content.. i am a male so i can`t speak for the females ,who, i hope will give their input on this topic for discussion.and i mean it as a serious discussion.. males experience erections from the time they are babies and the natural thing to do is to hold it , and before you know it fondling it gives you releif.. society doesnt help by making you feel guilty and like shit as a dirty person.why in the world do babes ,young children ,young boys get erections before they even know what it`s function is for.

if a god designed sex for procreation then surely this wouldnt become an issue until they reached the age of puberty ,not when a male is still a baby.. and getting back to my op nowhere in the bible does it talk about masturbation which surely has been going on since adam was a boy/man.. i`m sorry, but to deny that you would have to be a complete idiot ,imbecile ,fool ,or just brain dead.. so for 4000 years of inspired scriptures from god ,nothing is said about a condition that effects every man from his birth to his death .. makes you wonder doesn`t it ?.

smiddy.

88JM

It's funny you should bring up this topic - I was reminding myself of the crazy stuff in the "Youth" book last night.

You say they don't make it a heavy sin, but it gets pretty heavy in this chapter.

I wrote some comments, and decided the whole thing was a giant guilt trip.

Sorry for the long post...

43

Markan priority and the synoptic gospels

by 88JM in

this might be a question for leolaia, but i noticed in researching the gospel of mark this week that the dates the wtbts gives for the writing of the other synoptic gospels does not seem to agree with most new testament scholars.. the all scripture book gives the following dates:.

matthew: writing completed: c. 41 c.e.mark: writing completed: c. 6065 c.e.luke: writing completed: c. 5658 c.e.this would put mark as the last of the three synoptic gospels to be written, and therefore the wtbts does not adhere to the markan priority hypothesis.. wikipedia states that: "the theory of markan priority is today accepted by the majority of new testament scholars".. .

is there a good reason why the wtbts dates the synoptic gospels in that order?how can they date matthew and luke so early?is it merely because the wtbts rejects the possibility of a "q" source, and possibly even the idea of collusion between the writers altogether?or is it because many scholars put the writings of luke and matthew after the destruction of jerusalem, meaning the "prophecies" of destruction became historical accounts of past events by the time they were written?

88JM

Thanks for your research guys. I'll be interested to hear what Bobcat comes back with.

I see then that the WTBTS is a little closer to the NIV dates, but take it much futher in dating Matthew and Luke far earlier than any other source I've seen. Even the most conservative sources don't seem to date Matthew anything like as early as 41 C.E.