Posts by venus

13

The Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31)

by venus in

jws advise that we should not take this illustration as literal saying things such as heaven and hell are not in close proximity so that both the inmates can speak to each other, dipping the tip of one’s finger in water would not be enough to put off one’s thirst …etc.. interestingly, jesus himself did not want his listeners to take this illustration literally or figuratively because he mixed both, hence wanted to get the message typical of any story.

if we were to take the illustration figuratively, who do “dogs that came and licked sores of lazar” symbolize?

also, the rich man in the story makes a powerful point when he says: ‘if someone from the dead is resurrected and speaks his surviving family members on earth, they will repent.’ (luke 16:27-31) the powerful logic used in this argument is to be literal, can’t be figurative because it concerns about literal death of a person and his resurrection.. those who are concerned about determining whether this illustration is literal or figurative miss the simple message of this story: god plays no role in the affairs of man and everyone can learn from experience (own or from others) that there is sowing and reaping, hence everyone is free to choose his destiny..

venus

punkofnice,

You are right--convenience determines which parable is to be taken literally and figuratively.

When I first read the explanation of this parable in "Is this life all there is?" book, I told myself: 'this can't be, this nothing but mere intellectual exercise. If it were to be taken figuratively, Jesus would have explained it clearly without the possibility for anyone to grapple with with later.

Going for the details and trying to establish figurative uses is like "throwing the baby and keeping the bathing water."

13

The Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31)

by venus in

jws advise that we should not take this illustration as literal saying things such as heaven and hell are not in close proximity so that both the inmates can speak to each other, dipping the tip of one’s finger in water would not be enough to put off one’s thirst …etc.. interestingly, jesus himself did not want his listeners to take this illustration literally or figuratively because he mixed both, hence wanted to get the message typical of any story.

if we were to take the illustration figuratively, who do “dogs that came and licked sores of lazar” symbolize?

also, the rich man in the story makes a powerful point when he says: ‘if someone from the dead is resurrected and speaks his surviving family members on earth, they will repent.’ (luke 16:27-31) the powerful logic used in this argument is to be literal, can’t be figurative because it concerns about literal death of a person and his resurrection.. those who are concerned about determining whether this illustration is literal or figurative miss the simple message of this story: god plays no role in the affairs of man and everyone can learn from experience (own or from others) that there is sowing and reaping, hence everyone is free to choose his destiny..

venus

Confusedalot,

Listening to prophets means “whatever you desire for men to do to you, you. shall also do to them; for this is the law and the prophets.” (Mathew 7:12) Such altruistic attitude and action means doing good to others and refraining from doing harm to others! Working for the welfare of others with no thought of reciprocation would also bring gratitude and reciprocation from others. Even if that doesn’t happen in some cases, still it is beneficial because our very make-up is such that doing something nice for another person produces a pleasant feeling that behavioral economists call a warm glow and strengthens your immunity. University of Zurich researchers investigated how areas in the brain communicated to produce this feeling. (http://www.media.uzh.ch/en/Press-Releases/2017/Generosity.html) One’s attitude and action affect his body and mind, and even others who will respond accordingly; hence reaping happens without the intervention of God.

13

The Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31)

by venus in

jws advise that we should not take this illustration as literal saying things such as heaven and hell are not in close proximity so that both the inmates can speak to each other, dipping the tip of one’s finger in water would not be enough to put off one’s thirst …etc.. interestingly, jesus himself did not want his listeners to take this illustration literally or figuratively because he mixed both, hence wanted to get the message typical of any story.

if we were to take the illustration figuratively, who do “dogs that came and licked sores of lazar” symbolize?

also, the rich man in the story makes a powerful point when he says: ‘if someone from the dead is resurrected and speaks his surviving family members on earth, they will repent.’ (luke 16:27-31) the powerful logic used in this argument is to be literal, can’t be figurative because it concerns about literal death of a person and his resurrection.. those who are concerned about determining whether this illustration is literal or figurative miss the simple message of this story: god plays no role in the affairs of man and everyone can learn from experience (own or from others) that there is sowing and reaping, hence everyone is free to choose his destiny..

venus

steve2,

It is neither literal nor figurative because it is only a vessel that convey this simple message:

God plays no role in the affairs of man and everyone can learn from experience (own or from others) that there is sowing and reaping, hence everyone is free to choose his destiny

13

The Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31)

by venus in

jws advise that we should not take this illustration as literal saying things such as heaven and hell are not in close proximity so that both the inmates can speak to each other, dipping the tip of one’s finger in water would not be enough to put off one’s thirst …etc.. interestingly, jesus himself did not want his listeners to take this illustration literally or figuratively because he mixed both, hence wanted to get the message typical of any story.

if we were to take the illustration figuratively, who do “dogs that came and licked sores of lazar” symbolize?

also, the rich man in the story makes a powerful point when he says: ‘if someone from the dead is resurrected and speaks his surviving family members on earth, they will repent.’ (luke 16:27-31) the powerful logic used in this argument is to be literal, can’t be figurative because it concerns about literal death of a person and his resurrection.. those who are concerned about determining whether this illustration is literal or figurative miss the simple message of this story: god plays no role in the affairs of man and everyone can learn from experience (own or from others) that there is sowing and reaping, hence everyone is free to choose his destiny..

venus

JWs advise that we should not take this illustration as literal saying things such as heaven and hell are not in close proximity so that both the inmates can speak to each other, dipping the tip of one’s finger in water would not be enough to put off one’s thirst …etc.

Interestingly, Jesus himself did not want his listeners to take this illustration literally or figuratively because he mixed both, hence wanted to get the message typical of any story. If we were to take the illustration figuratively, who do “dogs that came and licked sores of Lazar” symbolize?

Also, the rich man in the story makes a powerful point when he says: ‘if someone from the dead is resurrected and speaks his surviving family members on earth, they will repent.’ (Luke 16:27-31) The powerful logic used in this argument is to be literal, can’t be figurative because it concerns about literal death of a person and his resurrection.

Those who are concerned about determining whether this illustration is literal or figurative miss the simple message of this story: God plays no role in the affairs of man and everyone can learn from experience (own or from others) that there is sowing and reaping, hence everyone is free to choose his destiny.

8

The forgotten victims in Job

by Saltheart Foamfollower in

after todays watchtower, i realised that there was a detail which i'd never noticed before.

sometimes job's children are mentioned, but how many have noticed that job's servants were also killed.

they didn't even have a quantity assigned to them - just treated like property.

venus

When Bible writers adopt stories from other cultures, they would naturally do some modification to avoid being blamed for blind copying, thus they would add things such as "Job's servants were also killed."

Story is obviously of human origin because it does not glorify God who is being projected as one treating Satan superior as though God is in need of validation from Satan.

61

Set the record straight!

by Colinconfused in

i would like to state publicly, on this forum, i no longer hold the views i had a year ago.. with much thought, research, study and logical examination i have come to a better understanding of my beliefs and where i stand on all these issues.. i'm very happy to announce i have returned to healthful teaching of the holy scriptures and i firmly believe that the governing body of jehovah's witnesses is the faithful slave.. sorry if i have contibuted to any kind of stumbling and know that if i can turn things around then there's hope for all who come to there sence.. phill4:6,7.

venus

When you return to irrational beliefs it strengthens the stand of those who left them. Light (freedom) has meaning only when there is darkness (slavery).

11

Isn’t concept of sinner itself faulty?

by venus in

a person may sometimes get swelling on his leg and may have limped a few times—but he is never called lame.

similarly, sometimes a person may slip into selfishness and use his free-will to his own harm or to the harm of others—but this does not make him a sinner because the ability to do the contrary (ability choose to commit virtuous act to any extent) too exists in him.

if one’s occasional sinning does not make him a sinner, sin of another person (such as first human couple) can never make others sinners.

venus

ttdtt,

You put it rightly "social agreement." That means it would vary from community to community.

You can see proof among JWs. Many things what the world considers to be holy are unholy to them, and vice versa. Child-abuse performed by the worldly people are treated one way, and those performed by elders are treated differently.

3

A question to ask the trolley Witnesses

by The Fall Guy in

"do jehovah' witnesses believe that it's ok to receive messages from dead people who are in heaven?

re chap.

20 pp.

venus

If a JW says he received some information from the 24 elders from heaven, a JC will judge him as having had demonic contact.

GB will not behave like Eli who encouraged young Samuel to get more information from God (because of ego-problem)

11

Isn’t concept of sinner itself faulty?

by venus in

a person may sometimes get swelling on his leg and may have limped a few times—but he is never called lame.

similarly, sometimes a person may slip into selfishness and use his free-will to his own harm or to the harm of others—but this does not make him a sinner because the ability to do the contrary (ability choose to commit virtuous act to any extent) too exists in him.

if one’s occasional sinning does not make him a sinner, sin of another person (such as first human couple) can never make others sinners.

venus

Concept that sin is hereditary is the invention of Paul who openly admits that he was not inspired--2 Cor. 11:17

7

Miracles and responses—both are not explicable

by venus in

a miracle is an event not explicable by natural or scientific laws.

bible reports many such miracles.

interestingly, responses to these reported miracles could be even labeled as a greater miracle which cannot be explained by any known law, logic or experience.

venus

Drearyweather,

You said: "No matter how good you do, you will always have some people who won’t be grateful for you have done, or will forget the favor you do to them. That’s what we call human, thankful today, thankless tomorrow."

If there is no ruler in the White House for 40 days, would the American people forget their founding fathers and all the bloodshed in the freedom struggle? Is it for no reason that finally God decreed only Joshua and Caleb would enter the promised land?

You provide three reasons why people rejecting Jesus. But they do not explain why should anyone prefer a bandit to an altruistic miracle worker.