Rattigan350

Joined

• started 85 topics
• posted 1,816 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Rattigan350

• 
  10

  JW apologist

  by jhine in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  jehovah’s witnesses and sexual abuse: 3. some common misunderstandings.

  a chap called terrill hamons who l am taking to be a jw apologist on quora sent me this link along with many others .

  the sites are all about how misunderstood and unfairly treated the wt is .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  Question:

  Why does the 9th commandment say "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour" (Exodus 20:16)

  Why does The Hebrew Bible contain a number of prohibitions against false witness, lying, spreading false reports, etc Exodus 20:16, Deuteronomy 5:20, Exodus 23:1-2, Proverbs 19:5, Isaiah 29:20-22

  Wouldn't it because Jehovah knew how people are? Untrustworthy liars

  And he believes in Blackstone's ratio which is "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
• 
  88

  New method to absolutely date Fall of Jerusalem.

  by waton in

  1. social
  2. current

  for what it is worth to those interested.

  1914.. tel-aviv university.

  "biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  I keep asking this question when this topic comes up: Why does it matter when Jerusalem fell?

  1914 is not based on the fall of Jerusalem. Just because Nelson Barbour thought it had to, does not mean that Jehovah God thought it did.

  The problem is that people rely on books like 'the Gentile Times Reconsidered" and are just as lost Rutherford, Russell and Barbour. Carl Olof just wrote it to argue against the Watchtower Society because he is so arrogant. He didn't write it to find the fulfillment of Nathan's prophesy to David to find when Jesus would become king.
• 
  88

  New method to absolutely date Fall of Jerusalem.

  by waton in

  1. social
  2. current

  for what it is worth to those interested.

  1914.. tel-aviv university.

  "biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  Why does it matter?

  1914 is not based on the fall of Jerusalem.

  Nelson Barbour thought it did and thus Charles Russell and his prodigy did.

  But that does not make it so.

  1914 is based on 2520 years after the kings in the line of David lost their sovereignty as sitting on Jehovah's throne in Jerusalem. That happened prior to the fall of Jerusalem.
• 
  173

  Is the tide turning against covid vaccines?

  by slimboyfat in

  1. social
  2. current

  have you seen this video about the covid vaccines?

  have you got any views on the information?

  i find it worrying at least.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  I heard on the news that alot of children are getting hospitalized for respiratory diseases not covid. Because of masking and distancing and not going to school they have not been exposed to viruses and germs to build a resistance to them.
• 
  28

  Was Jesus the Messiah circumcised ?

  by smiddy3 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  has this question ever been raised before by jehovah`s witnesses?

  and what`s the significance, if any ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  " being the son of God and perfect, etc, is there anything on the NT that we can conclude that JC was circumcised"

  The parents didn't know that. So they just followed the law like everyone else did. And Luke 2:21 "After eight days, when it was time to circumcise him, he was named Jesus, the name given by the angel before he was conceived"
• 
  37

  114,000, Literal, or Symbolic?

  by Wonderment in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a poster wrote to me privately, and brought to my attention the following comment below i made a while back in regards to the 144,00 number of revelation.

  i had casually conjectured that this number was likely symbolic in line with the book of revelation being mostly symbolic in kind.

  he brought up this juicy source:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  I agree with "If it is taken symbolically, no number in the book can be taken literally."
• 
  86

  Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

  by Disillusioned JW in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

  https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

  - (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  I don't care about the use of the word 'creationist'. I'm just saying that JWs are not followers of the movement that says the earth is 6000 years old.

  I haven't look into the Creation book since 1986. I have my own ideas about how it happened.

  I believe there were 2 creations, one prior to what was written in Genesis.
• 
  86

  Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

  by Disillusioned JW in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

  https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

  - (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  Evolution can not explain
  

  Well, yes it can, whether you accept it or not.
  And then the question is whether you accept, or don't accept it, based on knowing what the explanations are, or based on refusing to know what the explanations are.

  But they never do. All evolutionists do is say it happened and is true, but they can not explain how anything happened. If it is true, then explain it.
• 
  28

  Was Jesus the Messiah circumcised ?

  by smiddy3 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  has this question ever been raised before by jehovah`s witnesses?

  and what`s the significance, if any ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  Circumcision is not genital mutilation. It's fixing something that Jesus left off of the final design plans. Jesus made alot of mistakes in creation. That's why Jehovah had to take over and fix things.
• 
  86

  Is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the WT, charlatanism?

  by Disillusioned JW in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  is most of the promotion of creationism, not just that by the wt, charlatanism?.

  https://www.fullmoon.nu/sources.bak/chapter%2010/part%202/gish%20exposed.html [which has an article called "creationism: bad science or immoral pseudoscience?

  - (an expose of creationist dr. duane gish)"] says the following.. 'a look at the "scientific" creationist movement and a close examination of the tactics of a well-known and influential creationist will reveal that the creation "science" movement gains much of its strength through the use of distortion and scientifically unethical tactics.. .... with the facts explained and the lawsuits won, scientists declared victory and returned to their labs and offices.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rattigan350

  JWs aren't creationists.

  And the whole fossil thing is ridiculous.

  The very fact that females have mammaries that are triggered by pregnancy, and ovaries and a uterus and a canal that fits a penis that allows for fertilization and they get pleasure in the process; whereas men don’t have that, they have penis that fits in the canal that when ready to do that will take a shape to fit into it to fertilize those eggs and gets pleasure in the process.

  Evolution can not explain how an organism can split off and then evolve to the male and also evolve to the female where they have those separate functions. How would that one that evoles to a male know to alter the DNA to put a penis between the legs and then to make it erect to enter another person and then fertilze? How can a vagina evolve to fit a penis and then produce lubrication; when evolution has neither gender coordinating with each other. Why would mammaries even evolve since it is for the offspring? How could DNA of a mother evolve and mutate to develop organs for someone else?

  This all says there must be intelligent design. a creator that designed both to work together and he made it pleasurable so it gets done.