i've been physically out since early 2014. before that, i was mentally out for a long period of time.
now, having zero contact with family or former friends, plus living in a southeast asian country where it is possible to not ever see a jw.
since i have discovered this site, i'm learning lots of things about the organization that i wasn't aware of before.
Hi days of future passed, Good summary.
WT is preparing to say like Reuben who 'replied, "Didn't I tell you not to
sin [doing an act of shunning] against the boy? But you wouldn't listen! Now we must give an accounting for his blood." (Genesis 42:22)
perhaps this has been linked here before.
if that's the case, i'm sorry.
however, new people join, others miss things, some forget, so i thought it was worth posting, especially since this issue comes up from time to time and some here have never worked it out or are in the process of trying to do so.
Hi smiddy3
Whether those religious leaders said fully what God wanted them to do or not, or whether they had everything in common matters not because each of them was also offspring of the time in which they lived. The principle on which they based themselves was like knowledge of medical science as a whole; yet what each of them taught was like prescription Doctors write for their specific patients (which would often vary from case to case). What matters is whether patient is cured or not. Similarly, what matters is whether those religious leaders helped people to become spiritual or better humans or not which we know they did. In essence, they were all highlighting the need for humans to be humane which can be accomplished either with the help of the concept of God (for some) or without the concept of God (for others). That is why Jesus said: ‘Love God and your neighbor,’ and Mohammed said ‘love God and desire for others what you desire for yourself’, and Buddha taught the four noble truths and the eight-fold path that can be practiced without reference to the concept of God whose existence or non existence was irrelevant to him.
Problem arises because of later additions by commercially minded people. But this is not a problem for me. When I read scriptures I do with alertness like a musician who can easily know notes in the wrong places in the songs sung by others. Take the example of Genesis account. It is said that God created mankind as two group—male and female (Gen 1:26) and told them to eat of all the trees. Then when it says God created a couple and prohibited them eating from a particular tree, I take this as something symbolic—something that humanity as a whole did is depicted through a couple for simplicity sake. It shows through one couple how mankind experienced a fall from expanded view of being a world-wide family into contraction of thinking in terms of ‘me and mine’—a concept that is highlighted through the reference of ‘a tree of good and bad’ because in egoistic disposition we tend view things as good and bad depending upon our convenience. Rain is neither good nor bad; yet we sometimes say rain is good and other time we say it is bad. So Adam and Eve story highlights how mankind fell into a new awareness, of egoism. The way God dealt with them show that there is no forgiveness in the dictionary of God because every action must be responded to which is the Law of Nature; and so must be ego. Ego creates hell for the one who adopts it. (Habakkuk 2:5) Egolessness creates heaven for the one who adopts it (Luke 17:21). Hence anything I read in the scriptures that hints at the idea that sin can be atoned or forgiven I rate it as imagination of later writers—not of religious leaders.
perhaps this has been linked here before.
if that's the case, i'm sorry.
however, new people join, others miss things, some forget, so i thought it was worth posting, especially since this issue comes up from time to time and some here have never worked it out or are in the process of trying to do so.
perhaps this has been linked here before.
if that's the case, i'm sorry.
however, new people join, others miss things, some forget, so i thought it was worth posting, especially since this issue comes up from time to time and some here have never worked it out or are in the process of trying to do so.
I agree with his fourth point that discrepancies in the gospels do not argue Jesus never existed. Such discrepancies could be said about “most decent historical sources … such as contemporary biographies of modern figures” which would not prove they never existed. Husband and wife often disagree about their memories about things that happened years ago, months ago, weeks ago, days ago, or hours ago. Sometimes they both must be wrong; yet this misremembering is related to something that happened. It's faulty memory, not no memory.
An easy approach would be to look at the essence. Behind the details of all the branches of Science we see the essence: Science is the study of laws of nature (with a view to make use of them for our benefit) which means everything in the nature follows certain laws which would further imply that humans also must definitely follow certain laws that contribute to welfare of their own and of others if they want to enjoy their lives.
Similarly, behind the details all the branches of religion we see the essence: All great religious figures such as Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed …were sent by God to restore the remembrance of God which would help people to be good citizens of their respective countries. Hence what they spoke was truth beneficial for the people in their respective contexts. Later, commercial minded followers added things to the original teachings which make a mess of everything giving a reason for modern readers to doubt the historicity of religious leaders. (Mathew 13:24-30; Acts 20:29, 30) Thus what is of absolute clarity such as stated in Mathew 7:12, 21-23; 25:31-46 …are really from Jesus where as verses such as God-dishonoring (eg. John 9:1-3 …) are fabricated later.
i get it, not a fan of yahweh the desert god.
but what about jesus?
anything wrong with his teachings like the sermon on the mount and the example he set.
Such verses are not from a religious leader but from the Roman Empire who wanted people to be blindly subjective to it. Hence they saw to it that Bible contains things like 'show the other cheek; if someone in authority asks you to walk one mile, walk two miles' ... etc.... and verses glorifying slavery such as Mathew 24:45 ....
i get it, not a fan of yahweh the desert god.
but what about jesus?
anything wrong with his teachings like the sermon on the mount and the example he set.
Hi smiddy3
Almighty God can remain Almighty allowing people to choose His guidance or to ‘reap what they sow.’ (Luke 6:38) Almighty doesn’t mean He has to use His overwhelming force whenever people want to misuse their free-will. A Super Power on earth can see that no one violate traffic rules by putting some mechanism of overwhelming force on the road; yet Governments do with traffic signals which allows road-users freedom to use them to their benefit or to misuse them for their hurt. Remembrance of results of breaking traffic rules is very much available in the minds of all drivers; hence such a remembrance is almost like omnipresent. Yet when some people in the territory of a Super Power violate traffic rules it would not mean Government of that Super Power country would ‘sound like some crazy mixed up dude who can`t make his mind up on how to help or direct people on the road.’
In real life, things are even worse. People know greed would not benefit in the long run which they have observed from the lives of others. In addition, every country has some stories (like "How Much Land Does A Man Need?" of Tolstoy) to guide people. Yet “Richest 1% own half the world's wealth.” (https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/nov/14/worlds-richest-wealth-credit-suisse) Why are not people satisfied with enough accumulation for one generation?
i guess if the jdubs have no clue how long a generation is they also wouldn't know how long a time period the word "soon" refers too.. 60 years ago my mother would hammer into my brain how soon the great tribulation was.
soon jehovah would destroy the wicked.
then a few years later there was no need to go to college because the end was so soon.
Bernard Shaw perfectly understood the problem when he said:
"“No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says: He is always convinced that it says what he means.”"
i get it, not a fan of yahweh the desert god.
but what about jesus?
anything wrong with his teachings like the sermon on the mount and the example he set.
Behind the details of all the branches of Science we see the essence: Science is the study of laws of nature (with a view to make use of them for our benefit) which means everything in the nature follows certain laws which would further imply that humans also must definitely follow certain laws that contribute to welfare of their own and of others if they want to enjoy their lives.
Similarly, behind the details all the branches of religion we see the essence: All great religious figures such as Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed …were sent by God to restore the remembrance of God which would help people to be good citizens of their respective countries. Hence what they spoke was truth beneficial for the people in their respective contexts. Later, commercial minded followers added things to the original teachings which make a mess of everything giving a reason for modern readers to doubt the historicity of religious leaders. (Mathew 13:24-30; Acts 20:29, 30)
are you sinning?
do we want jesus death to be in vain.
we must not forget, if you never sin jesus died for nothin.
David rightly felt water brought risking the lives of the soldiers is equal to drinking the real blood of those soldiers or eating them alive.
Behind the details, the essence is that you should not help yourself putting the innocent ones at risk.
Similarly, God cannot even think that he would use the blood of an innocent one for any purpose--however loft that purpose may be because His hands are not too short to devise an effective tool to accomplish any purpose.
here is an interesting incident reported in the bible.. judah (the fourth son of jacob), the founder of the israelite tribe of judah, slept with her daughter-in-law tamar when she showed herself up as a prostitute in disguise.
(genesis 38:16, 17) “about three months later judah was told: "your daughter-in-law tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant.
" judah said, "bring her out and have her burned to death!
I agree with smiddy3
An unbiased reading would show that writer of Genesis is struggling to create details, and in his desperation repeating the details already written in small scale into large scale later:
1) From the promise given to Abraham earlier (“I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your offspring could be counted”—Gen 13:16) it is obvious that children would be born through Abraham. Yet we find all unnecessary scenes of Sarah asking Abraham to have child through their maid-servant: Hagar, and then dismissing her and her child later following family problems.
Later (Geneses 29-31) we find the same drama in larger scale: God is poorly depicted as fueling the competition of Lean and Rachel in giving birth children, and in the process giving the maidservants to their combined husband: Jacob
2) Abraham is brought out of Chaldeans to “take possession of land” (Genesis 15:7)—a small scale incident.
Israel is brought out of Egypt to “take possession of land”—a large scale event.
