i was an elder in prescott for many years... anyone now out from there?
.
Maybe the real problem with minimal responses has to do with the lack of information/transparency in the OP.
It's not likely someone is going to share information with a new member who's shared none themselves.
My first impression when I saw the post was that the OP could possibly be a current elder fishing for suspected apostates in his area.
they have writes hundreds of other repetitive books, but no bible commentary.
is it because an actually commentary would destroy their doctrine and prevent them from being able to cherry pick scriptures?.
Read a real commentary and compare it to the SI book. Not even close. The SI book is a presentation of WT theology cloked in a little bit of Bible trivia.
i must admit i can at times be a little "egotistical" when it comes to knowledge and the bible.
i have studied the bible for so long and have always had a passion for the bible as a jw and as an ex-jw.
i guess that is all i have left when it comes to religion and as humans we do tend to stroke our egos.
can we address the more salient question of why "totally" is in quotes in the topic title?
.
"Why" do you ask, Apog ? Isn't it "obvious"? I "totally" think "it" is "more" than "obvious".
they have writes hundreds of other repetitive books, but no bible commentary.
is it because an actually commentary would destroy their doctrine and prevent them from being able to cherry pick scriptures?.
The only attempt WT has made at a commentary is Commentary on the Letter of James. Ironically, it was written by Ed Dunlap, a man the WT disfellowshipped as an apostate right about the time Ray Franz left WT.
The other books listed above, most notably the Revelation Climax book, are not commentaries by any stretch of the imagination. They are poorly written works of fiction promoting WT doctrine- nothing more.
The reason WT does not produce true commentaries is that they would actually have to substantiate their teachings Biblically, which they cannot do. It was also expose their ignorance and teachings to true Bible scholars, who would tear it to shreds with little effort.
i must admit i can at times be a little "egotistical" when it comes to knowledge and the bible.
i have studied the bible for so long and have always had a passion for the bible as a jw and as an ex-jw.
i guess that is all i have left when it comes to religion and as humans we do tend to stroke our egos.
@ daringhart: If everyone that dies before Armageddon get a ressurection, why aren't JW's just out killing people to ensure they get to the Millinial Reign....why bother with field service??
-
According to WT dogma, everyone who hears WTs message now but fails to respond (i.e. becomes a Jehovah's Witness) is doomed; conversely, those who don't have the "privilege" of hearing WTs message will be resurrected.
To your point, the question then becomes: aren't JWs doing people a disservice by preaching?? If JWs did no preaching at all, then, in theory, 100% of the people Jehovah™ murders at Armageddon are eligible for a resurrection.
You're seeking an answer to the conundrum, but there's no answer that'll make any sense. Live your life.
i must admit i can at times be a little "egotistical" when it comes to knowledge and the bible.
i have studied the bible for so long and have always had a passion for the bible as a jw and as an ex-jw.
i guess that is all i have left when it comes to religion and as humans we do tend to stroke our egos.
Viv: And what would that problem be?
Answer: explaining it to rational people with a straight face.
,
@ pacloc: As for calling God cruel for killing babies, you must think out the argument further.
You should have stopped at "As".
i must admit i can at times be a little "egotistical" when it comes to knowledge and the bible.
i have studied the bible for so long and have always had a passion for the bible as a jw and as an ex-jw.
i guess that is all i have left when it comes to religion and as humans we do tend to stroke our egos.
IMO there was a major problem with genetic mixing back then.
.
There's not a shred of evidence to support such a claim. There are, however, plenty of fanciful musing from ancient goat herders about such matters.
i think we are already living in the age where there can be no new religions.
we have access to information like never before and anyone claiming revelations of something new and starting a whole new religion can easily be discredited.. christianity and islam may continue to subdivide but i think we've pretty much seen the end of anything new in terms of a new belief system.. .
what are your thoughts on this?.
We have access to information like never before
.
Access to information, facts and evidence rarely sways the mind of the religious devotee.
they key to free yourself from the organization is having mental clarity of what is happening in relation to the watchtower, inside and out.
their basic concept is that they are god's sole organization on earth.
there really is no basis for anyone to make that statement.
I think this quote sums up what, in essence, changed my thinking:
"Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones."
Marcus Aurelius
.
The Dakota's had the right idea too:
Old Dakota Indian Proverb: "when you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount".
i must admit i can at times be a little "egotistical" when it comes to knowledge and the bible.
i have studied the bible for so long and have always had a passion for the bible as a jw and as an ex-jw.
i guess that is all i have left when it comes to religion and as humans we do tend to stroke our egos.
Richard Dawkins summed up the god of the OT more succinctly than anyone else:
.
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it, a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” - Richard Dawkins
