Posts by A Paduan

31

An Eye for an Eye: Bible Error

by JosephAlward in

many months ago i offered the "eye for an eye" conflict as evidence that the bible cannot be trusted to provide non-contradictory moral guidance.

since that time many new people have joined this forum, so i present this bible "difficulty" once again:.

scripture teaches that one should destroy one's enemies, and take an eye for an eye: "show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

A Paduan

The only thing I've argued is that those parts of the Bible which seem to be contradictory probably would not have come from God.

Joseph,

The contradictions or errors that you point out are actually matters of literacy, and do not impact upon the spiritual teachings of the stories.

one need not necessarily believe that ALL of the Bible is error-free in order to believe that nevertheless some parts of it may have been inspired by God.

As I was trying to put to you - "inspired by God" and "error free literacy" are entirely different ways of thinking.

paduan

31

An Eye for an Eye: Bible Error

by JosephAlward in

many months ago i offered the "eye for an eye" conflict as evidence that the bible cannot be trusted to provide non-contradictory moral guidance.

since that time many new people have joined this forum, so i present this bible "difficulty" once again:.

scripture teaches that one should destroy one's enemies, and take an eye for an eye: "show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

You have said as much in your post, that you realise the bible was never intended to be literal. Indeed the bible itself plainly shows that. Yet, in your hearing, that translates to you as meaning it is not even God's word. Are you simply stuck at that point?

Where indeed have you acquired your firmity about the manner in which the Spirit should or should not speak? From literal style language itself? From within? From other men?

"The God said to him in a dream" - I wonder what type of language that was.

paduan

Edited by - a paduan on 11 October 2002 21:50:13

Are there stats?

by A Paduan in

has anyone read data about religious denomination / mental heath issues.

my perceptions from working is that jws are well represented as mental health consumers, but then again there may just be more of them living in the region.

there are many people living as mh care consumers, but are all denominations equally represented?

A Paduan

Has anyone read data about religious denomination / mental heath issues. My perceptions from working is that jws are well represented as mental health consumers, but then again there may just be more of them living in the region.

There are many people living as MH care consumers, but are all denominations equally represented? I have been involved in the care of young adults (jw children) who exhibit some of the most disturbing behaviour that we encounter. So disturbing that confidentiality prevents me from disclosing it even as an altered story - too rare and disturbing to not get out.

paduan

Edited by - a paduan on 13 October 2002 8:41:8

12

Monotheism, Your comments please

by pseudoxristos in

while discussing jw's concept of jesus as a god (in a yahoo group), the following was posted to define "monotheism".

i'm looking for comments or thoughts from everyone here before i post a my reply.. ...you asked for a definition of "monotheism" and/or "biblical .

monotheism" which would allow for the existence of multiple gods.

A Paduan

This is true of them either collectively or as individuals, so long as their position and glory preserve or further enhance the uniqueness of God

The position of someone's indoor plants (household gods) in the structure of their life can preserve the glory of God. By the definition, all things may be "gods".

Monotheism - a pecking order of gods down from God?

For a religion of "brothers with no clergy" jwism is highly preoccupied with pecking orders .

Edited by - a paduan on 11 October 2002 4:13:52

31

An Eye for an Eye: Bible Error

by JosephAlward in

many months ago i offered the "eye for an eye" conflict as evidence that the bible cannot be trusted to provide non-contradictory moral guidance.

since that time many new people have joined this forum, so i present this bible "difficulty" once again:.

scripture teaches that one should destroy one's enemies, and take an eye for an eye: "show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

A Paduan

Christ expunded on the effect of misinterpretation via the literal application of spiritual language.

"YOU have heard that it was said, but I say to you...."

Often we hear simply as we want to, how we have been conditioned to, or even how we are threatened to.

" take heed then how you hear, for to him who has more will be given "

paduan

Edited by - a paduan on 11 October 2002 3:3:36

5

PRIVACY

by DoNotCall in

jw
friends

dedicated to my friendly neighborhood stalker .

valued possessions.

is my privacy .

A Paduan

My mental health study at the moment leads me to think that jwism produces and attracts people of various personality disorders - unlike other major illness where boundaries may not be realised, the PDs seen with jw notions promote recalcitrance to the idea of boundaries for the 'unworthy' - seen by such extreme ideas like picking your post-armageddon residence.

The personality disorders are various, and range from B.P.D. (borderline) with an underlying fear of abandonment, to anti-social whereby others are shit and plainly unworthy of good things.

Who knows, one day there might be government funded therapy ready in place for jwism.

paduan

Edited by - a paduan on 10 October 2002 5:2:57

9

WATCHTOWER TAKEN DOWN

by Smokey in

i have been pondering a lot of what is going on with jws regarding the current issue of child molestation and i am concerned that a lot of this will be settled out of court and these horrible crimes will not be remembered.

i know already that this situation has died down somewhat since it first came to light.

i feel really bad and hope that these people will receive their justice.

A Paduan

We are entering the information age. I would think that the time will come when the wtbts will be seen as ridiculous by very many. However, many people still see clean skin and suits as denoting respectibility.

paduan

18

Hurling the First Stone

by orangefatcat in

jw
friends

i am a firm believer in that scripture that if a person is without sin let him hurl the first stone.

i cannot believe the hostility that is going on in the forum.

we are grown adults we have opinions but do our opinions and feelings have to come down to mud slinging?

A Paduan

No, I don't Yardiff. Could you explain further?

21

There Iz No Peace

by comforter in

jw
friends

i thank you peeps know the rest of verse.

lol.

but comfy would never exult over opposers knot having peace among themmselves.

A Paduan

What you have said to me is that you are not at peace. I can understand that. It's a thing about jwism.

4

Hemopure = blood

by undercover in

if it's made from blood, then it has blood particles in it.

if you're gonna adhere to some bible law that says no blood, shouldn't anything that contains blood parts be included?

but now it's okay to use hemopure or other particles of blood.

A Paduan

Hopefully, like other things, they don't even know - lives will be saved and the foolishness of their whole activity will be exposed a little later on.