Posts by rocketman

37

10 Pragmatic facts why Jehovah's Witnesses can't face reality

by Terry in

jw
friends

1.the organization itself denies access to reality and substitutes its own version, interpretations and meanings.. a.only watchtower approved publications are allowed.. b.no higher education is to be pursued.. c.no non-jw friends or associations are encouraged with their "outside" points of view.. d.no free-style questioning of doctrine or criticism permitted.

curiousity is verboten.. e.threat of being "marked" or disassociated looms over them.

2.between every real-world event and the rank and file jw's mind is a roadblock.. a.the moment of identifying is short-circuited by an interpretive moment of re-labeling in watchtower-speak.. b.all things happening are forced into a narrow storyline and propagandized as end times happenings leading to armageddon.. 3.social and personal identity is expunged and replaced by a collective persona: "jehovah's witness".. a.private thinking is red-flagged as selfish and sinful.. b.personal improvement, welfare and ambition is crushed and door-to-door ministry substituted as "worthy" endeavors.. c.self-conscious obsession permeates witness awareness as each person is transformed into a public spectacle of performance for judgement.. d.since you aren't an individual you don't really have a right to fall in love and marry or educate or earn.

rocketman

"They never said they were perfect". Very true. And yet, as we know, the loyal jw is expected to treat the "spiritual food" as though it comes from God, which implies that it is perfect.

Until that jw notices that a mistake was made - a missed date for Armageddon perhaps. Or, he is informed that there is a change in "understanding" of a teaching.

Then, it's "they never said they were perfect".

In the meantime, it is implied, or even directly stated, that the fault lies with the average jw, who harbored "expectations" that turned out to be unrealistic, even though the expectations were created by Watchtower teachings.

23

The Fossil Record: vs God Allowing Pain & Suffering

by Shanagirl in

what a man does with the fossil record tells a lot about his worldview.

is it the result of a world-covering deluge?

or did this sorry chronicle of pain, suffering, and death precede humans (and the reign of death) by millions of years?

rocketman

Shanagirl made the point - this is not intended as a thread about Evolution vs Creation.

23

The Fossil Record: vs God Allowing Pain & Suffering

by Shanagirl in

what a man does with the fossil record tells a lot about his worldview.

is it the result of a world-covering deluge?

or did this sorry chronicle of pain, suffering, and death precede humans (and the reign of death) by millions of years?

rocketman

If I had a dime for every misunderstanding of the word Theory as it applies to evolution and science in general...

127

OK..Seriously..Has GOD ever answered your prayers????

by DATA-DOG in

look...i am not an atheist.

even so, i have never had one prayer answered my entire life.

the only thing that would even come close was learning ttatt.

rocketman

I've never experienced an answered prayer. But I've never truly prayed in faith either. Even as a jw elder, I was never really sure that God answered prayers.

Part of the problem is that either way, God has an out, as it were, because we are told (and not just by the Watchtower) that God doesn't necessrily answer all prayers, even those directed to him in faith. He may wait, or deem it better for us that the prayer isn't answered.

Well, if the answer is no, why aren't we told that? Instead, we are asked to somehow presume that when nothing happens, that means God has either said No or that he wants us to wait. But we have no way of knowing.

A parent doesn't do that to his children. In Matthew, Jesus compared God's response to our requests to that of a parent "who knows how to give good gifts to his children". But if, as a parent, the answer is no, the parent will say No. The child is at least getting an answer.

Imagine asking a parent for something and not getting any answer back. Silence. Not even a "we'll wait and see".

That's part of my problem with the whole thing. We don't know where we really stand.

135

Shark Evolution

by metatron in

jw
friends

http://descrier.co.uk/science/fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=fossil-discovery-shows-model-evolution-sharks.

i used to consider sharks to be evidence for creation - and against evolution because it was stated that they are largely unchanged after millions of years ( hence, 'what evolution?')..

that's not the case, however.

rocketman

So let's summarize:

Cofty was called Coffy, but issued a correction. But perhaps this Coffy will convey an advantage and eventually appear elsewhere on this board in the future.

In fact, I put forth that in the future, Coffy will be called Coffe, and eventually, Coffee, with the obvious survival advantage of reminding us all of a aromatic beverage that many of us like to consume.

Evolution, explained!

I'm just playing around.

I find this thread very interesting, with many fine posts by Satanus, Ruby,OldHippie, Snare&Racket, and Coffy.

21

The Golden Rule, proof that a higher intelligence did NOT write the Bible

by jws in

jw
friends

the golden rule, matthew 7:12:.

so in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the law and the prophets.. .

a whle back i had a management course.

rocketman

In the context of both NT quotes (Matt 7:12, Luke 6:31) Jesus is talking about giving to others, rather than witholding something unpleasant. As the Wikipedia article quoted above states, it's a positive form of the idea rather than the negative.

As far as treating others they way they would want to be treated, that's a worthwhile endeavor, but to me it doesn't really go beyond Jesus's words, simply because I think Jesus is stating something about giving in general. So in essence, the rule is a general one, and if a person wants to discern what others might want or how they want to be treated, that's all well and good, but I don't see how it makes the concept superior or the Golden Rule inferior.

28

The best explanation of Matthew 24 and 'This Generation', that I've read so far

by Island Man in

http://meletivivlon.com/2014/04/02/this-generation-a-new-premise/.

rocketman

There's liitle doubt that the first-century Christians thought the second coming would take place during their lifetime, their "generation".

If one applies Jesus' words only to the first-century, the generation is basically wrapped up quite neatly, spanning from 33 to 70 AD, a nice, neat 37 years.

But there's that nagging little problem - no return by Jesus in 70 AD or any time shortly thereafter. No rapture, no meeting Christ "in the air".

If we apply the "generation" to a later time than that, we're back to all the problems that the WTS has faced all these years - trying to figure out when it applies.

But as I stated earlier, I think the linked article from that Boreans site is the best guess in view of the fact that no other post- 70 AD applications have succeeded.

28

The best explanation of Matthew 24 and 'This Generation', that I've read so far

by Island Man in

http://meletivivlon.com/2014/04/02/this-generation-a-new-premise/.

rocketman

Actually, I tend to agree with the assessment in the article, namely, that Jesus was referring to only the last part of the prophecy and that's the generation he was talking about - the one that sees 'the sign of the Son of Man' appear in heaven as related in verses 29-31.

In fact, I think the Society should have (and possibly still will in the future) applied 'this generation' to the generation that witnesses and lives during the Great Tribulation.

28