A Paduan

Joined

• started 231 topics
• posted 3,006 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by A Paduan

• 
  30

  Lying is fine!

  by Gill in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in this article of the watchtower, february 1st 2007, we get some very typical watchtower double talk.. 'why be truthful?

  ' is the article.

  page 6 says,.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A Paduan

  Is a liar necessarily a fraud, or is a fraud necessarily a liar ?

  By their definition it appears that one can be a fraud but not a liar.

  frauds (at least)
• 
  30

  Lying is fine!

  by Gill in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in this article of the watchtower, february 1st 2007, we get some very typical watchtower double talk.. 'why be truthful?

  ' is the article.

  page 6 says,.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A Paduan

  Regardless of any "overt intention of deception through saying known untruths", it is deception that is utilised in the incompleteness of their speaking to the 'unworthy', and it is deception that is utilised when they suppress the "old light" in their own minds as they speak.

  Yes, lying includes the intention to deceive someone. Hence to speak an untruth unwittingly - such as giving someone incorrect facts or figures by mistake - is not the same as to tell a lie.

  Moreover, we need to consider whether the person asking for the information is entitled to a comprehensive answer.'

  So perhaps being a really ignorant blind guide is not so much of a sin ?

  And witholding truth with the intention to deceive is quite ok ? You could probably do ok in insurance fraud with that philosophy.
• 
  30

  Lying is fine!

  by Gill in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in this article of the watchtower, february 1st 2007, we get some very typical watchtower double talk.. 'why be truthful?

  ' is the article.

  page 6 says,.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A Paduan

  A dictionary defines............

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Sources not utilised by the wtbts:

  etymology online
  lie (verb) - to speak falsely
  lie (noun) - an untruth

  other definitionsan inaccurate or false statement
  to express what is false

  Oxford includes....."a situation involving deception or founded on a mistaken impression"
• 
  1

  Tactics for confronting and exposing false teachers....

  by The Dragon in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have noticed for some time how the method for combat against what many people define as false teaching or brainwashing usually includes and consists of attacks and acusations against those they feel are perpetrating these things against others.

  these attacks seem to have the opposite effect as intended..and are defined by the perps as "persecution" of the truth...and easy to defeat as they have no undisputable truth to back them up...or a theory paried by a theory if you will.

  it even solidifys their position..as they were not defeated or moved by the your attack.. .

  1. 
• 

  A Paduan

  These attacks seem to have the opposite effect as intended..and are defined by the perps as "persecution" of the truth...and easy to defeat as they have no undisputable truth to back them up...or a theory paried by a theory if you will.

  If all your previous agendas have turned out to be bogus fantasy, you surely have no moral uprightness in actively promoting your new unsubstantiated agenda........if your snake oil has never worked and you took good hard earned money for it from people, what business have you covering that up while you try and sell yet another batch of your own snake oil.

  It is true, that making it your business to go around promoting your unsubstantiated agenda by telling lies, half truths, misquotes, and out of context references (and concealing information about your group and it's status) to gain something from another, is immoral.
• 
  10

  1st century christians...........

  by A Paduan in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  there's seems to be much pride taken in religious purity if the practice of '1st century christians' is sought out and copied.

  i have also heard mention of 'early christian' practice spoken of to defend the blood issue.. so what makes the '1st century christians' actually christians, and not largely represented by fundamentalist nuts too ?

  so now many antichrists have comei'd say there were just as many (by proportion) standover fearful religious nuts full of literal rules, back when some people first literally didn't eat blood, or literally get circumcised etc.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A Paduan

  Regarding the Matthew citations

  • Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them.

  Exactly - he came and said there was no need to interpret them that way, that it was simply burdensome, and being abused

  • Not every one who says to me, `Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

  Which is to believe his son...the law is spiritual.... indeed in the next line..."Lord, Lord, did we not.......do many mighty works in your name?'

  • Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.

  If you are suggesting that tithing mint and dill and cummin may appropriately be a literal ask, then the next line is a bit tricky...... straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel

  I see nothing that calls for any support of literalism, but I do see how one could use it to convince themself of it.

  ---------------------------------------------------

  I can't help but agree with Pauline thought in this matter.........."their god is their belly"
• 
  10

  1st century christians...........

  by A Paduan in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  there's seems to be much pride taken in religious purity if the practice of '1st century christians' is sought out and copied.

  i have also heard mention of 'early christian' practice spoken of to defend the blood issue.. so what makes the '1st century christians' actually christians, and not largely represented by fundamentalist nuts too ?

  so now many antichrists have comei'd say there were just as many (by proportion) standover fearful religious nuts full of literal rules, back when some people first literally didn't eat blood, or literally get circumcised etc.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A Paduan

  I'll just repeat - I'm saying that there was not some type of over-riding historically culturally identifiable "authentic christianity" that if followed 2000 years later provides the practitioner some type of authenticity. The wtbts and others cite various behaviours of "early christians" to boost confidence in their own authenticity - but a model of ritual is not without question on the basis of being "early christian" - Johannine or Pauline ....

  as Christ said, "many false prophets will arise and lead many astray" and "Take heed that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name..."

  He didn't say "there'll be one or two bad examples"

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  I suppose at a stretch you could say I am describing "authentic christianity"..........but only like saying I'm describing a 'good person' by saying that murderers are not

  I certainly don't side with what is now mainstream christianity, but in regard to literalism, I do believe "the flesh is of no avail"

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• 
  14

  Do other religions have questions you're not allowed to ask ?

  by A Paduan in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  there seem to be certain unanswerable questions that only "apostates" would ask - ones that sort of send up a flare.. do other religions have these "you must be the debbil" fears of thought ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A Paduan

  do you think they answer things like politicians ?

  ie. an answer that doesn't directly address the question - or even answer something you weren't actually asking
• 
  10

  1st century christians...........

  by A Paduan in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  there's seems to be much pride taken in religious purity if the practice of '1st century christians' is sought out and copied.

  i have also heard mention of 'early christian' practice spoken of to defend the blood issue.. so what makes the '1st century christians' actually christians, and not largely represented by fundamentalist nuts too ?

  so now many antichrists have comei'd say there were just as many (by proportion) standover fearful religious nuts full of literal rules, back when some people first literally didn't eat blood, or literally get circumcised etc.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A Paduan

  you are implicitly claiming one authoritative, transhistorical definition of "christians"

  no, I'm saying that there wasn't some over-riding predominance of "authentic christianity" at the time, but rather - plenty that wasn't

  • so now many antichrists have come

  One identifying mark of disconcordance with scripture, now, and then, is literal fundamentalism

  • we know that the law is spiritual
  • real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal
• 
  10

  1st century christians...........

  by A Paduan in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  there's seems to be much pride taken in religious purity if the practice of '1st century christians' is sought out and copied.

  i have also heard mention of 'early christian' practice spoken of to defend the blood issue.. so what makes the '1st century christians' actually christians, and not largely represented by fundamentalist nuts too ?

  so now many antichrists have comei'd say there were just as many (by proportion) standover fearful religious nuts full of literal rules, back when some people first literally didn't eat blood, or literally get circumcised etc.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A Paduan

  There's seems to be much pride taken in religious purity if the practice of '1st century christians' is sought out and copied. I have also heard mention of 'early christian' practice spoken of to defend the blood issue.

  So what makes the '1st century christians' actually christians, and not largely represented by fundamentalist nuts too ?

  • so now many antichrists have come

  I'd say there were just as many (by proportion) standover fearful religious nuts full of literal rules, back when some people first literally didn't eat blood, or literally get circumcised etc.
• 
  14

  Do other religions have questions you're not allowed to ask ?

  by A Paduan in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  there seem to be certain unanswerable questions that only "apostates" would ask - ones that sort of send up a flare.. do other religions have these "you must be the debbil" fears of thought ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A Paduan

  There seem to be certain unanswerable questions that only "apostates" would ask - ones that sort of send up a flare.

  Do other religions have these "you must be the debbil" fears of thought ?