EdenOne

Joined

• started 155 topics
• posted 2,912 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by EdenOne

• 
  284

  I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it just dawned on me.

  the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

  so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  Cofty, God's absence doesn't allow me to make any statements about God. Except that he's absent, which is a verifiable fact.

  Eden
• 
  284

  I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it just dawned on me.

  the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

  so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  No, this is not a belief in a God that is absent. It's a belief that the only thing that can be said about God is that God is absent.

  Eden
• 
  284

  I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it just dawned on me.

  the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

  so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  Cofty, by definition there's no evidence of anything's inexistence, God's or otherwise. Yahweh or Thor or the Big Unicorn in the Sky. Gotta love that rabid neo-atheism, huh? However, the ABSENCE of something or someone CAN be attested. And hence, I declare myself "absentheist".

  Eden
• 
  284

  I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it just dawned on me.

  the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

  so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  It just dawned on me. The existence of God can't be proved, neither is there evidence of God's inexistence. So, I'm neither theist neither atheist. To be an agnostic is to embrace the possibility that God may exist, without evidence to back it up and the certainity that God cannot be known. So, what evidence is there about God? In a word: his ABSENCE. So, here's my newly found belief: I'm ABSENTHEIST.

  Are you one also?

  Eden
• 
  9

  Does anyone else find reinstated dubs can be the most hypocritical?

  by William Penwell in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have seen this over the years that some that get df'd and later reinstated can be the most hypocritical.

  one case comes to find about my nephew who was df'd about 10 years ago for cupping a little feel of some dub sisters boobs.

  well right away he turns to us non dubs for moral support as he is being ostracized by the dub relatives.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  It's all about WHO you know in the Org ...

  Eden
• 
  68

  Help needed: Written material regarding shunning of DF'd and DA'd individuals

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i would like this to become a permanent thread, because i think there are grounds - at least in europe - to take this matter up to the european court of human rights.

  not sure we'll ever get there, but one must start somewhere.

  objective: force, by legal means, the watchtower society and the jehovah's witnesses to stop the practice of shunning ex-jehovah's witnesses, on grounds that it constitutes a violation of human rights.. what is needed: all written material ever published by the watchtower society, especially since 1940's, concerning the practice of shunning.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  The discourse of the Jehovah's Witnesses leadership, as published in the authoritative publications of the Watchtower Society can correctly be characterized as "hate speech".

  What is "hate speech"?

  From Wiki: "Hate speech is, outside the law, speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as gender, ethnic origin, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation. In law, hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group."

  The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) states that "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law".

  The European Court of Human Rights is deeply concerned with hate speech.
  

  “... [T]olerance and respect for the equal dignity of all human beings constitute the foundations of a democratic, pluralistic society. That being so, as a matter of principle it may be considered necessary in certain democratic societies to sanction or even prevent all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify hatred based on intolerance ..., provided that any ‘formalities’, ‘conditions’, ‘restrictions’ or ‘penalties’ imposed are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.” (Erbakan v. Turkey judgment of 6 July 2006, § 56). - European Court of Human Rights

  
  

  -----

  "12. The Assembly reaffirms that hate speech against persons, whether on religious grounds or otherwise, should be penalised by law in accordance with General Policy Recommendation No. 7 on national legislation to combat racism and racial discrimination produced by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI). For speech to qualify as hate speech in this sense, it is necessary that it be directed against a person or a specific group of persons. National law should penalise statements that call for a person or a group of persons to be subjected to hatred, discrimination or violence on grounds of their religion." - Extracted from Recommendation 1805 (2007) from the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly
  
• 
  68

  Help needed: Written material regarding shunning of DF'd and DA'd individuals

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i would like this to become a permanent thread, because i think there are grounds - at least in europe - to take this matter up to the european court of human rights.

  not sure we'll ever get there, but one must start somewhere.

  objective: force, by legal means, the watchtower society and the jehovah's witnesses to stop the practice of shunning ex-jehovah's witnesses, on grounds that it constitutes a violation of human rights.. what is needed: all written material ever published by the watchtower society, especially since 1940's, concerning the practice of shunning.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  “We do not have spiritual or social fellowship with disfellowshipped ones. (...) Is strict avoidance really necessary? Yes, for several reasons. First, it is a matter of loyalty to God and his Word. We obey Jehovah not only when is convenient but also when doing so presents real challenges. (...) Second, withdrawing from an unrepentant wrongdoer protects us and the rest of the congregation from spiritual and moral contamination (...)” – “Keep Yourself In God’s Love” (Appendix) pp. 207
• 
  68

  Help needed: Written material regarding shunning of DF'd and DA'd individuals

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i would like this to become a permanent thread, because i think there are grounds - at least in europe - to take this matter up to the european court of human rights.

  not sure we'll ever get there, but one must start somewhere.

  objective: force, by legal means, the watchtower society and the jehovah's witnesses to stop the practice of shunning ex-jehovah's witnesses, on grounds that it constitutes a violation of human rights.. what is needed: all written material ever published by the watchtower society, especially since 1940's, concerning the practice of shunning.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  After characterizing dissenters from the Organization as "haters of Jehovah", the Watchtower instructed the Jehovah's Witnesses:

  “Haters of God and his people are to be hated (...) We must hate in the truest sense, which is to regard with extreme and active aversion, to consider as loathsome, odious, filthy, to detest. Surely any haters of God are not fit to live in this beautiful earth. (...) What do you do with anything loathsome or repugnant that you detest or abhor? The answer is simple. You get away from it or remove it from your presence. You do not want to have anything at all to do with it. This must be exactly our attitude towards the haters of Jehovah.” – The Watchtower, October 1, 1952, pp. 599

  Hate is thus regarded as a desirable quality among Jehovah's Witnesses:

  “You have seen the benefit of godly love, but do you know how to hate? The bible psalmist did, and said: “O you lovers of Jehovah, hate what is bad”. Also, he said: “Do I not hate those who are intensly hating you, O Jehovah, and do i not feel a loathing for those revolting against you? With a complete hatred I do hate them. They have become my real enemies” (Ps. 97:10; 139:21, 22) These very strong words are an expression of godly hate, and you too must have this quality to be pleasing to God. Hate causes a feeling of disgust to well up inside you. You loathe, abhor, despise the object of your hatred. (...) Godly hatred never has as its object our Christian brothers, no matter how imperfect.” – The Watchtower, July 15, 1974, pp. 442

  Eden
• 
  14

  'Theocratic Warfare' - Do you know when and where it started?

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we all hear this notion of "theocratic warfare", and how it is used to justify jehovah's witnesses to lie or withhold the truth even under oath, based on the reasoning that we don't owe the truth to those who aren't entitled to it.

  but, can we put our finger on where this doctrine started?

  well, brace yourselves, here it is.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  I have to say, for all his madness, Fred Franz was a terrific public speaker and the only semblance of a scholar that the WTS ever had. Very much hammering on the "charismatic" tone, still he was abe to deliver an electrifying speech. Too bad the content was rubbish. I heard him live in the 80's, but he was already quite old and pretty much blind already.

  Eden
• 
  14

  'Theocratic Warfare' - Do you know when and where it started?

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we all hear this notion of "theocratic warfare", and how it is used to justify jehovah's witnesses to lie or withhold the truth even under oath, based on the reasoning that we don't owe the truth to those who aren't entitled to it.

  but, can we put our finger on where this doctrine started?

  well, brace yourselves, here it is.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  We all hear this notion of "Theocratic warfare", and how it is used to justify Jehovah's Witnesses to lie or withhold the truth even under oath, based on the reasoning that we don't owe the truth to those who aren't entitled to it. But, can we put our finger on where this doctrine started? Well, brace yourselves, here it is.

  Who concocted this doctrine? None other than Frederick F. Franz, vice-president of the Watchtower Society, in July 24th, 1955, in a speech delivered at the District Convention "Triumphant Kingdom".

  The title of the speech was "Cautious as Sperpents Among Wolves". You can hear the original recording here, (mp3) if you have the stomach to hear it all. Franz uses a series of Bible examples to justify lying as part of "theocratic warfare" from the Jehovah's Witnesses.

  Eden