Oubliette

Joined

• started 96 topics
• posted 7,450 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Oubliette

• 
  15

  Any good answers at this Sunday's WT?

  by Lemonp in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  obviously this weeks' wt has been part 3 of big changes in the doctrine.

  at the end i answered up saying along the lines of: "as we can see from the illustration box, when it comes to the reward being given to the slaves, divine appointment was not given in 1919. this will happen in future when the anointed get taken before armageddon".

  i couldn't bring myself to say "raptured at armageddon" as i think people might have taken a closer look at me...but it felt good to call out publicly the bull sh#t date of 1919 .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  Splash: The article starts by saying that this parable of the talents applies to the anointed.

  Wouldn't that be applying the type/antitype method of interpretation they JUST said they don't do anymore!
• 
  88

  Damned if they do, Damned if they don't

  by FusionTheism in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i see an attitude among some people here which is not very helpful.

  i can understand it, but still, it's not constructive or helpful.. if you condemn the society for not changing, but then you also condemn them when they do change in a positive way, what incentive or motive does that provide for the people at the society to ever want to change for the better?.

  also, what does that attitude look like to current witnesses who are having doubts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  Steve2: The mistake here, as on other similar threads before, is to assume that the poster whose OP has elicited so many responses is actually going through these one by one, thoughtfully weighing up the arguments.

  I don't know if your comments are in relation to my most recent post and others like them, but I don't post expecting a response from FT.
  

  I post for the benefit of lurkers.

  People like FT never respond to questions like mine for a very simple reason. If they did, it would only prove my point. Their silence is a second best approximation of acknowledgement.
  
• 
  88

  Damned if they do, Damned if they don't

  by FusionTheism in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i see an attitude among some people here which is not very helpful.

  i can understand it, but still, it's not constructive or helpful.. if you condemn the society for not changing, but then you also condemn them when they do change in a positive way, what incentive or motive does that provide for the people at the society to ever want to change for the better?.

  also, what does that attitude look like to current witnesses who are having doubts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  Fusion Theism, on the first page of this thread I asked you to respond to two points:
  

  1. Just exactly what "positive" changes have they made recently? Please be specific, emphasizing how each and every said change is in fact "positive."
  2. Could you please provide quotes and references in where "the Society" has "admitted to errors" and that "they've been wrong in big ways." I would appreciate seeing those exact words, or even anything remotely close to that, in print in a WTBTS publication as I am unaware of "the Society" or any of their high-level representatives (ie: the Governing Body members) ever making such an honest admission.

  -
  

  We are now on page seven and you have yet to respond. Why is that?

  Oubliette
  
• 
  88

  Damned if they do, Damned if they don't

  by FusionTheism in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i see an attitude among some people here which is not very helpful.

  i can understand it, but still, it's not constructive or helpful.. if you condemn the society for not changing, but then you also condemn them when they do change in a positive way, what incentive or motive does that provide for the people at the society to ever want to change for the better?.

  also, what does that attitude look like to current witnesses who are having doubts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  Pete Zahut: They condemn other religions for teaching falsehoods yet have done the same thing themselves from the very beginning. Unlike the Catholics, they have never come out and formally apologized for the falsehoods and wrongdoings of those who went before them nor for the ones they taught or committed themselves.

  Exactly!
  
• 
  88

  Damned if they do, Damned if they don't

  by FusionTheism in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i see an attitude among some people here which is not very helpful.

  i can understand it, but still, it's not constructive or helpful.. if you condemn the society for not changing, but then you also condemn them when they do change in a positive way, what incentive or motive does that provide for the people at the society to ever want to change for the better?.

  also, what does that attitude look like to current witnesses who are having doubts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  Island Man: Do you think Watchower is unaware that 607 BCE is false? They know it's false! Carl Johnson wrote a book logically showing its false and sent them a copy.

  You forgot to mention that Johnson was disfellowshipped as a result of his efforts to correct this false teaching.

  THAT is how the WT leadership responds to genuine efforts from its members to correct errors.

  Let's review: It's a cult!

  
  
  
• 
  88

  Damned if they do, Damned if they don't

  by FusionTheism in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i see an attitude among some people here which is not very helpful.

  i can understand it, but still, it's not constructive or helpful.. if you condemn the society for not changing, but then you also condemn them when they do change in a positive way, what incentive or motive does that provide for the people at the society to ever want to change for the better?.

  also, what does that attitude look like to current witnesses who are having doubts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  FT, Read what Irish Catholic Archbishop, Diarmuid Martin, the archbishop of Dublin recently said in response to Ireland's legalizing of same-sex marriage by popular vote:
  

  “We [the church] have to stop and have a reality check, not move into denial of the realities."

  The leaders of the WTBTS have NEVER said anything remotely as honest or enlightened.
  
• 
  88

  Damned if they do, Damned if they don't

  by FusionTheism in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i see an attitude among some people here which is not very helpful.

  i can understand it, but still, it's not constructive or helpful.. if you condemn the society for not changing, but then you also condemn them when they do change in a positive way, what incentive or motive does that provide for the people at the society to ever want to change for the better?.

  also, what does that attitude look like to current witnesses who are having doubts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  FT: you also condemn them when they DO change in a positive way

  Just exactly what "positive" changes have they made recently? Please be specific, emphasizing how each and every said change is in fact "positive."
  

  FT: they recently have admitted to errors and say they've been wrong in big ways in the past

  Could you please provide quotes and references in where "the Society" has "admitted to errors" and that "they've been wrong in big ways." I would appreciate seeing those exact words, or even anything remotely close to that, in print in a WTBTS publication as I am unaware of "the Society" or any of their high-level representatives (ie: the Governing Body members) ever making such an honest admission.

  Thank you in advance.

  Oubliette
  
• 
  10

  An excellent (and funny) example of Cognitive Bias

  by Slave4_38y in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  i saw this and immediately thought about how this relates to us.

  once you've learned how to ride the ttatt-bicycle it's almost impossible to ride the "truth"-bicycle again.

  https://youtu.be/mfzdabzbll0.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  GT, for whatever reason I had no problem understanding your previous post.... lol!

  My comments were directed to the guy (I think his name is Destin) that made the video in the OP.
• 
  10

  An excellent (and funny) example of Cognitive Bias

  by Slave4_38y in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  i saw this and immediately thought about how this relates to us.

  once you've learned how to ride the ttatt-bicycle it's almost impossible to ride the "truth"-bicycle again.

  https://youtu.be/mfzdabzbll0.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  Well that was interesting but it wasn't very scientific. Anecdotal evidence is never more than intriguing at best.

  Also, his conflation of motor skills with cognitive biases is unsupported by any neuroscience which I know of. If someone can provide an important scholarly study supporting this claim I'd love to read it.

  And the concluding comment that "welders are often smarter than engineers" is just dumb.
  
• 
  53

  Spirituality

  by Jonathan Drake in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  if you are a current practitioner of some religious faith i would appreciate it if you abstained from this thread entirely.

  im curious if anyone has had what could be discribed as a spiritual experience.

  i'm currently reading sam harris book waking up and it's very good so far.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Oubliette

  JD, great thread. Thanks for starting it.

  I'm a big fan a Sam Harris. Although I don't agree with everything he says or promotes, I appreciate that he gets dialogues going on topics which a lot of people tend to avoid for what I think are obvious reasons: they are controversial because they challenge people's beliefs.

  You should have quoted the full title of Sam's book: Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion

  
  

  What I appreciated most about his book was the frank discussion of our "spiritual" nature. I also understood why he had to spend (several pages?) explaining just what HE means by the word "spiritual" in his discussion. I don't have a copy of the book handy, but as I recall he discusses how that word can mean so many different and often conflicting things--ideas and beliefs which he certainly does NOT hold. Nevertheless, we don't really have an appropriate word in English for the ideas which he has come to believe and want to share. And so, within the constraints of meaning as he explains it, that is the word he uses.

  I also like the fact that he exposes how susceptible we are to charlatans and scam-artists (can you say WTBTS?) because of our innate desire for the spiritual.
  

  As much as I really enjoyed his book for the reasons I listed above, I had a couple of gripes about it.

  One, he talked a lot about the illusion of self. He used this and similar expressions all throughout the book but never clearly articulated exactly what he meant by them. This is, I have found, a common trait of his writing and speaking. It's a little odd because he clearly understood the need to define what he means when he uses the term "spirituality," so I expected he would have done the same regarding his idea of "the illusion of self," but unfortunately--at least as far as I could tell-he never clearly did.

  His 2012 speech on "The Delusion of Free Will" has similar problems. He is clearly using the expression free will to mean something different than what most people mean when they use it, but he never clarifies or defines those shared meanings or differences. Alas, the curse of knowledge.

  Free Will
  

  Finally, and perhaps this explains his omission regarding the self, the organization of the book was kind of clunky; it didn't flow. It felt like he cobbled together a bunch of essays, notes and blog posts to create a book, yet didn't take the time or effort to edit it for flow and continuity.

  All that being said, I think this is an important book for ex-JWs that are well on their way out of the cult and into a life of purpose and meaning without the baggage of religion. Although not definitive on the subject, Harris' book is thought-provoking and intriguing. While not claiming to provide final answers, it will definitely get you asking the right questions for yourself, which is ultimately what I think Harris is after in this book as well as his general body of work.

  Two