Posts by venus

9

Contrast Jesus and Einstein

by venus in

8 years ago

jesus did not use his (superhuman) skills to prove the existence of either god or immortality of soul.

further, he did not answer direct, important questions put to him (mathew 21:23-27; luke 22:70 …), and most importantly never defined ego—the root cause of all problems ….

however, einstein, whose business was not spirituality, still defined ego as “optical illusion of consciousness.” this definition helps a lot because when one internalizes the idea that ego is only an illusion, he knows how to effectively deal with it.. .

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

Waton,

This is not about the means of transportation both used; but subjects of vital and primary importance such as existence of God, soul, definition of ego …etc. There are even times when Jesus did not know the answer to the simple question put to him, yet gave an answer that dishonored God. (John 9:1-3). Then there are cases of comparing pagans with dogs, glorifying slavery (Mathew 24:45) etc. Regarding walking over water and other miracles he supposedly performed—did he really perform them? If so, a disturbing question would arise: Why did the witnesses and beneficiaries of those miracles not put up a corresponding response such as coming in support of him when he was subjected to a mockery of trial, taking up preaching work even after his death …. etc.

Link

9

Contrast Jesus and Einstein

by venus in

8 years ago

jesus did not use his (superhuman) skills to prove the existence of either god or immortality of soul.

further, he did not answer direct, important questions put to him (mathew 21:23-27; luke 22:70 …), and most importantly never defined ego—the root cause of all problems ….

however, einstein, whose business was not spirituality, still defined ego as “optical illusion of consciousness.” this definition helps a lot because when one internalizes the idea that ego is only an illusion, he knows how to effectively deal with it.. .

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

Onager, defining insanity, like the definition of ego, is too wonderful. That means Einstein was better than many professed religious leaders.

Link

9

Contrast Jesus and Einstein

by venus in

8 years ago

jesus did not use his (superhuman) skills to prove the existence of either god or immortality of soul.

further, he did not answer direct, important questions put to him (mathew 21:23-27; luke 22:70 …), and most importantly never defined ego—the root cause of all problems ….

however, einstein, whose business was not spirituality, still defined ego as “optical illusion of consciousness.” this definition helps a lot because when one internalizes the idea that ego is only an illusion, he knows how to effectively deal with it.. .

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

Jesus did not use his (superhuman) skills to prove the existence of either God or immortality of soul. Further, he did not answer direct, important questions put to him (Mathew 21:23-27; Luke 22:70 …), and most importantly never defined ego—the root cause of all problems …

However, Einstein, whose business was not spirituality, still defined ego as “optical illusion of consciousness.” This definition helps a lot because when one internalizes the idea that ego is only an illusion, he knows how to effectively deal with it.

Link

22

Who holds the Burden Of Proof?

by stuckinarut2 in

8 years ago

when we as former witnesses wake up and choose to leave the society, it is mainly because we value truth and honesty.. the society tries to make out that we are in the wrong.

that we have "left the truth".. but, who really holds the burden of proof?

do we (who leave) need to prove that the society is not the "truth", or does the society need to prove that it is the "truth".. thoughts?.

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

WT world is the representation of the world outside. For example Einstein found out that: “Our separation of each other is an optical illusion of consciousness.” Though Einstein’s insights revolutionized physicists’ view of space/time “reality”, we haven’t yet changed our way of thinking about such “reality”. Until now, most of Humanity has mistakenly kept behaving as if we are separated from each other and from Nature, and not part of it. This behavior has resulted in continuing selfishness, cruelty, wars and unsustainable and disharmonious exploitation of our precious planet. JWs feel they were specially blessed by God while others are pagans. They appeal to the individual’s sense of importance. They preach that you are special and your life has a grand purpose while the world is in darkness ….

Link

+2 / -0

22

Who holds the Burden Of Proof?

by stuckinarut2 in

8 years ago

when we as former witnesses wake up and choose to leave the society, it is mainly because we value truth and honesty.. the society tries to make out that we are in the wrong.

that we have "left the truth".. but, who really holds the burden of proof?

do we (who leave) need to prove that the society is not the "truth", or does the society need to prove that it is the "truth".. thoughts?.

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

They will not accept the proof. For example, try giving one example of a bible verse which every knows as "not being inspired"! They would not accept it.

Hence no point in proving them wrong.

Link

42

“Tree of good and bad” means what?

by venus in

8 years ago

if “tree of good and bad” were literal, it would mean adam and eve would know what is “good and bad” only after eating of that tree.

however, even before eating of it, they would think “it is good for us to eat of this tree” which means they are already endowed knowledge of “good and bad.” that means “tree of good and bad” is symbolic of something.. since religious organizations interpret this differently, each reader has to adopt his own conclusion.

for me it looks like this: one thinks of good and bad in relation to himself—if something is beneficial for him he would say it is good for him, and bad for him if it is not beneficial.

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

David_Jay,

That means through this allegorical story, Moses was preparing a mind-set in Jews that ‘disobedience to God’s first law brought calamity, hence ensure obedience to the Law that is going to be given now which would only benefit you.’

Thank you very much for this really great insight you gave. This understanding through the minds of Jews help to understand other parts of the Bible too.

Link

3

“Evil,” according to Jesus

by venus in

8 years ago

jesus defines “evil” in mathew 7:21-23: .

“not everyone who says to me, ‘lord, lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my father who is in heaven.

many will say to me on that day, ‘lord, lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ then i will tell them plainly, ‘i never knew you.

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

Jesus defines “evil” in Mathew 7:21-23:

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ [“you who practice evil, International Standard Version]”

Thus Evil means:

Calling Jesus “Lord,” prophesying/preaching in his name, driving out demons and performing many miracles in ignorance of Father’s will [treating every human being as child of God, not as pagan—Mathew 7:12].

This definition is understood by ordinary people only (Mathew 11:25)

Link

+1 / -0

42

“Tree of good and bad” means what?

by venus in

8 years ago

if “tree of good and bad” were literal, it would mean adam and eve would know what is “good and bad” only after eating of that tree.

however, even before eating of it, they would think “it is good for us to eat of this tree” which means they are already endowed knowledge of “good and bad.” that means “tree of good and bad” is symbolic of something.. since religious organizations interpret this differently, each reader has to adopt his own conclusion.

for me it looks like this: one thinks of good and bad in relation to himself—if something is beneficial for him he would say it is good for him, and bad for him if it is not beneficial.

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

Brokeback Watchtower,

I agree with you—story is the best humans could think of as the reason behind their fall. God is no where in the picture.

Link

42

“Tree of good and bad” means what?

by venus in

8 years ago

if “tree of good and bad” were literal, it would mean adam and eve would know what is “good and bad” only after eating of that tree.

however, even before eating of it, they would think “it is good for us to eat of this tree” which means they are already endowed knowledge of “good and bad.” that means “tree of good and bad” is symbolic of something.. since religious organizations interpret this differently, each reader has to adopt his own conclusion.

for me it looks like this: one thinks of good and bad in relation to himself—if something is beneficial for him he would say it is good for him, and bad for him if it is not beneficial.

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

Deegee,

Nice point: “God did not alert Adam and Eve to the presence of the snake or instruct them to avoid it.”

If account is really from God, He would have included that valid point too. That shows account of tree of good and bad is the imagination humans who best thought of the reason behind humans’ fall—and that is the best they could think of.

If man is really created His image, God doesn’t have to instruct him about any matter—humans will do exactly what God would do if He were on earth.

If tree were not literal, then snake also could not have been literal. Snake may be symbol of sin which has access to man wherever he is.

Link

42

“Tree of good and bad” means what?

by venus in

8 years ago

if “tree of good and bad” were literal, it would mean adam and eve would know what is “good and bad” only after eating of that tree.

however, even before eating of it, they would think “it is good for us to eat of this tree” which means they are already endowed knowledge of “good and bad.” that means “tree of good and bad” is symbolic of something.. since religious organizations interpret this differently, each reader has to adopt his own conclusion.

for me it looks like this: one thinks of good and bad in relation to himself—if something is beneficial for him he would say it is good for him, and bad for him if it is not beneficial.

8 years ago

venus 8 years ago

Halfbana,

Myths are like traffic lights--Red, Green, Amber. which are not simply physical objects. They carry specific messages. A story doesn't have to be historical, but the point is that it should carry some message.

Tree of good and bad carry the message how humanity had a fall. They fell when they listened to their ego and gone into exile of unhappiness and suffering.

That means:

Ego creates suffering (as shown by First Adam)

Suffering destroys ego (as shown by Second Adam--Jesus)

Link