Posts by EdenOne

57

Your opinion is watchtower extremist?

by poopie in

jw
friends

court gave 4 reasons you agree disagree.

EdenOne

Definitions of "extremism" and "extremist":

"belief in and support for ideas that are very far from what most people consider correct or reasonable"
"advocacy of extreme measures or views"
"a person who favours or resorts to immoderate, uncompromising, or fanatical methods or behavior"

Now think about some of the beliefs and practices held by the Jehovah's Witnesses. Do they fit the definitions?

A Jehovah's Witness will rather die (or let his infant child die) rather than accept a blood transfusion that may save her life;
Jehovah's Witness hold that their religion is the only true religion and all other religions are destined to be destroyed by God;
Jehovah's Witnesses will rather be fined, imprisioned, tortured, and executed rather than getting involved in mandatory military service;
Jehovah's Witnesses will completely ostracize former members of the religion, including family members who don't live in the household.
Jehovah's Witnesses will expel from their household non-dependent family members who engage in ongoing immoral (by their definition) sexual behavior.
Jehovah's Witness will terminate unilaterally fellowship with whomever develop a disagreement with even one doctrine or practice advocated at any given time by their leadership.
Jehovah's Witnesses will chose to be considered socially awkward rather than joining the mainstream society in celebrating holidays, birthdays,etc ...
Jehovah's Witnesses teach hatred towards other religions.
Jehovah's Witness are expected to mindlessly and acritically obey every instruction from their leadership.
Jehovah's Witness believe they are a specially sanctified spiritual elite and that they must live separated from the world, which they believe is wholly controlled by Satan, thus abstaining from exercising their civil rights and obligations.

All of the above (and some more) fits entirely in the definition of extremism ...

70

Apologists saying that the JWs shouldn't be banned, what the hell!??

by Crazyguy in

it's been brought to my attention that there are xjw that say they support the witnesses and don't think russia should ban them.

i would just like to remind all of you that jws are guilty of murder, causing higher rates of suicide, covering up child molestation, and keeping members in prisoned because if they leave they loose family, financial support, possible employment etc.. sure their not strapping bombs to their chests but they easily get members to kill themselves with their blood policies.

they are an extremist group!

EdenOne

honest

no, I am better then them. They are willing to sacrifice their children and themselves for a crazy ideology. I'm not willing to sacrifice them for that ideology. Unless they had committed a crime. It's the organization that should be prosecuted, not its believers.

70

Apologists saying that the JWs shouldn't be banned, what the hell!??

by Crazyguy in

it's been brought to my attention that there are xjw that say they support the witnesses and don't think russia should ban them.

i would just like to remind all of you that jws are guilty of murder, causing higher rates of suicide, covering up child molestation, and keeping members in prisoned because if they leave they loose family, financial support, possible employment etc.. sure their not strapping bombs to their chests but they easily get members to kill themselves with their blood policies.

they are an extremist group!

EdenOne

I don't think my 80-year old half demented JW mother would deserve to be put in jail for wanting to attend a religious meeting of the JW's. That's just not a fair thing.

There are other ways the Russian authorities CAN curtail the harm done by the JW organization. Attacking the 150.000 believers isn't one of them.

Tax them, sue them, regulate them, fine them. Works better than a blanket ban.

5

Had Putin Reconsidered the ban of Watch Tower in RUSSIA ?

by lusitano o tuga in

where is the source ???.

is it that a big snowstorm will stop the trial in the supreme russian court and the case will be postponed?.

the modern elijahs prayed to the true god and he heard or he will hear and he will bring a great blizzard(snowstorm) in moscow or st. petersburg and prevent judgment against jehovah's witnesses?

EdenOne

April 1st, anyone...?

4

Spanish: Child abuses within JW. Fact and evidence video

by sp74bb in

the independent evangelical tv media in latinoamérica, tvgracia, has made a special program of 35 min in spanish regarding how abuses are managed within jw:.

https://youtu.be/-l2kl5tzz1k.

EdenOne

"independent evangelical" - isn't that a contradiction?

5

How To Treat Disfellowshipped Ones - According To 1 August 1974 Watchtower

by pale.emperor in

are you seeing what im seeing?.

.

EdenOne

This was during the short-lived Watchtower Spring that ended in the all-out witch hunting against Ray Franz and all other independent thinkers. Within 6 years all that was hardened 100x again.

9

Not Inspired, Not Infallible

by pale.emperor in

it occurred to me this morning while one the train to work that jw's, including my family, use the following weasel phrases to excuse the errors they've made over the years:.

"god uses imperfect men".

"jesus didn't say he'd give perfect spiritual food".

EdenOne

Jesus didn't preach door-to-door as his main method, did he? He would stay at people's homes for hospitality purposes; How come Matthew 24:14 is being fulfilled by the Jehovah's Witnesses alone? Look at how many ministries are out there, many with ubiquitous presence on the internet, radio, television, schools ... much more effective ministry than the depressing literature carts ...

24

Pretend to support Critical Thinking, but forbid it when directed toward the "leadership"

by doubtfull1799 in

this from the latest watchtower article on propaganda:.

"keep in mind that satan does not want you to think clearly or reason things out well.

because propaganda “is likely to be most effective,” says one source, “if peo- ple .

EdenOne

What a pearl! Thanks

42

#1 ANSWER THIS: Why would an omnibenevolent and omniscient god put us through tests of faith?

by EdenOne in

i'll be starting a series "answer this:" with thought-provoking questions for debate.

your arguments for and against are most welcome.. i'll start with this: .

why would an omnibenevolent and omniscient god put us through tests of faith?.

EdenOne

I think that's why the majority of formal definitions of atheism have denial and/or lack.

Even conceptually, denial of god's existence is but a subset of a broader lack of belief. Someone who denies the existence of god necessarily doesn't believe in a god; however, someone who doesn't believe in god isn't necessarily making any statement about god's existence.

An agnostic lacks belief in god, not primarily because of lack of convincing evidence, but because he is persuaded that the existence or non-existence of god(s) is in principle unknowable. As a consequence, he is only sure that he has unsolvable doubts; when in doubt, he will generally opt for the most reliable knowledge available: empirical knowledge and reason. He may also take the apatheist position which is: the existence or not of deities is irrelevant.

Free-will is imprevisible and the future it's unknown by nature.

Not according to texts like Isaiah 46:10 and 1 Samuel 23:12, 1 John 3:20. The future is knowable to god. Again, special pleading.

42

#1 ANSWER THIS: Why would an omnibenevolent and omniscient god put us through tests of faith?

by EdenOne in

i'll be starting a series "answer this:" with thought-provoking questions for debate.

your arguments for and against are most welcome.. i'll start with this: .

why would an omnibenevolent and omniscient god put us through tests of faith?.

EdenOne

If god is bound by his own nature, and his own nature is being omniscient, isn't it true that restricting the exercise of his power goes against the nature of god? For what purpose?

Why is it necessary that god shuts down his omniscience to allow the exercise of free will? I'll tell you why: Because, if god knew in advance the negative outcome of each individual's choices and did nothing about it to stop evil from happening, that would make god complicit with evil, and that is something a true believer would not have. That's why believers demand that god shuts down his "exercise of omniscience" - so that god doesn't look bad. But you can't have the cake and eat it too, can you?

In any judicial system, failing to provide assistance to someone in distress when you are able to do so is considered a crime. Why are believers seeking a "special pleading" for god, exempting him from the same principles and standards that universally accepted ethics entail?

How much more serious, then, would be to actively subject someone to distress, usually with third-party innocents being hurt, just to test their faith or integrity? That isn't consistent with the idea of a 'god of love'.