Posts by Island Man

8

BLONDIE'S COMMENTS YOU WILL NOT HEAR AT THE 07-05-2015 WT STUDY (SATAN)

by blondie in

blondies comments you will not hear at the 07-05-2015 wt study (satan)(may 15, 2015 issue).

http://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/.

the 4th of july in the us is mainly a misnomer.

Island Man

Two things that stood out to me in this week's study:

1. Watchtower says Satan does not have a soft spot for children. But is Jehovah any better? When Jehovah killed millions of babies during the flood of Noah's day, was he showing a soft spot for children? When Jehovah had the first born of every Egyptian killed - which undoubtedly included many babies - was he showing a soft spot for children? When Jehovah ordered the Israelites to kill all the children and infants of the Amalekites and other Canaanite groups was he showing a soft spot for children? The biblical account shows that Jehovah has killed far more infants than Satan!

2. The powerful acts performed by faithful angels are used as gauges to suggest that fallen angels - the demons and Satan - must be very powerful beings. I'm not disputing that angels and demons are more powerful beings than humans.The bible makes this clear. What I'm disputing is the idea that we can get a true impression of the extent of their inherent power by looking at accounts like that of the angel that struck down 185,000 soldiers. To do so would be fallacious for two important reasons.

Firstly, the Watchtower is foolishly assuming that the powerful acts the bible records angels doing were done entirely with their own inherent power. But it may be the case that Jehovah infused special power into these angels to allow them to do those specific tasks. To illustrate, think of the powerful works done by Samson, Elijah, Elisha and others. Would it be wise to use their powerful works as evidence that humans are very powerful beings capable of miraculous works and that a sinner must therefore be a very powerful enemy of God? No. The faithful OT prophets and judges were infused with special power beyond their inherent human capabilities. Although not explicitly stated in the bible, the same may be true of the angels. That angel that slay 185,000 soldiers could have done it with extra power given him for the task, by Jehovah.

Secondly, since satan and the demons have been cast out of heaven, they would logically be cut off from their source of extra power - Jehovah. The kinds of power that Jehovah feeds to his faithful angels to do his will, would logically not be available to Satan and the demons. Watchtower has even in the past stated that the demons powers were limited by Jehovah when they were cast into deep darkness - Tartarus - after the flood, so that they can no longer materialize fleshly bodies. Therefore it is utterly foolish to point to the powerful feats of faithful angels to gauge the extent of power possessed by unfaithful satan and the demons who have been abased.

9

An excellent, very civil debate between an atheist and a JW.

by Island Man in

i stumbled upon this video while doing my periodic youtube search of the keyword "jehovah".

in the video a jw (actually two jws, but only one does most of the speaking) debate an atheist.

the atheist is a mild-mannered iranian who at first seems deceptively easy and clueless (i think it has to do with the fact that english is not his first language), but soon proves he's no walkover - calmly, mildly and civilly.

Island Man

I stumbled upon this video while doing my periodic YouTube search of the keyword "Jehovah". In the video a JW (actually two JWs, but only one does most of the speaking) debate an atheist.

The atheist is a mild-mannered Iranian who at first seems deceptively easy and clueless (I think it has to do with the fact that English is not his first language), but soon proves he's no walkover - calmly, mildly and civilly. He gave some excellent arguments refuting the JWs' argument from design and argument from fine tuned earth. He even exposed their special pleading for the existence of a complex god lacking a designer right back onto them by applying it to the existence of the universe!

The JWs were not able to offer any meaningful rebuttals to his points and ended up resorting to the fallacious argument from final consequences. At times you get the sense from looking at the JWs that they inwardly realize he's making good points they can't refute.

Enjoy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFHBPStlp2w

21

Who were the Sadducees and the Pharisees?? Are there similarities between them and JW's??

by confuzzlediam in

last month, i had the privilege of traveling to jamaica with a study abroad group from my community college.

while there, we went to a place called my father's house in which severely disabled children lived when they had no one else to take care of them.

as part of their day, they hold worship in a small, outdoor meeting place.

Island Man

I don't know much about the Sadducees. But boy are the Pharisees similar to the JWs!

One of the core tenets of Watchtower theology is being separate from the world. While the bible tells christians to be no part of the world, the JWs take this to extreme levels applying it even to trivial matters. They seem to think being different in and of itself is a virtue rather than being different only to the end of not following what is wrong in the world. The JWs' legalistic and obsessive need to be separate from the world and especially christendom brings me to this striking similarity with the pharisees - the name pharisee means separated ones!

34

Do you ever feel strangely drawn towards Conspiracy Theories?

by JW_Rogue in

after mentally awakening to the idea that jws don't have the truth i strangely found myself delving into all encompassing conspiracy theories.

not that i believed them but something about them seemed quite fascinating.

i was especially drawn to the idea of a new world order/one world government.

Island Man

Do I every feel strangely drawn to conspiracy theories?

Well, sometimes I feel drawn to them the same way I feel drawn to a good comedy or drawn to gawking at the site of a terrible, guts-spilling, brain-splattering, limb-scattering car crash. But drawn to them the way I'm drawn to finding out the truth of a matter - no.

131

On the Relevancy of The Institutionalization of Sin

by Perry in

child murder, sodomy & corrupting the human genome are not new sins, they are old ones.

what is new is their institutionalization.

but even that isn't totally new.

Island Man

"Homosexuality is a genetic disorder"

I don't think disorder is the right word for it.

"At contrary, they tends to prove that homosexuality is basically normal."

I don't think normal is the right word for it either.

Homosexuality is a natural and harmless anomaly that affects a small percentage of sexually reproducing species.

Disorders are deleterious disruptions of the normal functioning of the mind or body. Being attracted to the same sex is not a deleterious disruption of the functioning of the mind or body.

However, homosexuals have bodies that are "designed" for heterosexual intercourse, so the fact that they are sexually attracted to the same sex does not fit with their "design" and so is not normal.

So homosexuality is basically a harmless anomaly affecting a small percentage of sexually reproducing species. Given that it is harmless, there is no point in treating it or trying to outlaw it or trying to restrict the desires or sexual privileges normally afforded to heterosexuals.

Discriminating against homosexuals is as stupid as discriminating against left-handed people.

The bible is a backward book written centuries before the dark ages, when ignorance, prejudice and superstitions reigned supreme. It is foolish to look to a book that condones/orders genocide, slavery, misogyny, etc, as an infallible moral guide of right and wrong.

9

Shunning... the thing jdubs don't speak of

by freemindfade in

standing in the back now during the wt study.

looking ahead i find it comical paragraph 14.

"...you know how disfellowshipped ones are to be treated.

Island Man

What I find even more interesting is the fact that recent literature never mentions those who disassociate and how they are to be treated. It seems like Watchtower is very embarrassed about how they treat those who resign and are unwilling to leave a record of it in print.

5

God, Love, and Marriage vs. WTBTS dogma - when this one scripture is so plain....!

by Muddy Waters in

got to thinking about this the other day.... you know how the wts uses a scripture from ecclesiastes (ecc.4:12) to say how important it is to have jehovah in your marriage -- that a two-fold cord is easily broken or pulled apart, but a "three-fold cord is not easily broken".

they then go on to define exactly who and what jehovah is and what exactly this love & marital arrangement means and how you properly show and demonstrate it, and blah blah blah and all the things jehovah (through his organization) says are so necessary and important for a happy marriage (from their special bias and agenda, the preaching work!

- and meeting attendance & preparation, and studying the bible together and the husband taking the lead, and all that jw filler which they define and obligate for others to do -- they define every term and behavior and expectation to the nth degree.. then it occurred to me, that there's that scripture which says: "god is love.".

Island Man

"You don't need all the religious rigamarol and trapping and defining and telling you what to do. Most people know what love means and how you show it. Most people know the right thing to do and how to treat each other with kindness, respect, love, etc. (unless you're a psychopath or have some serious issues & problems!)"

The JW response to that would be something like:

"Only Jehovah's people demonstrate true love. The world does not know what true love is because one cannot exhibit true love if he doesn't know and live by Jehovah's righteous standards. There is no true love to be found outside of Jehovah's organization."

34

Tax-exempt Status of Churches and the Gay Marriage Decision

by lambsbottom in

jw
friends

it will be interesting to see what will happen with the "beloved" 501c3 tax exempt status which the churches hold so dearly onto.

the first-century christians met in homes.

they did not have exemption from taxes to the governments.

Island Man

"To get married at a KH, you have to be a good standing JW. You can't just walk in off the streets and say you want to be married at a KH. If they are still allowed to disfellowship you, then they could DF a gay person. Then they couldn't get married due to the good standing JW rule."

Contrary to your claim, I can think of a scenario where this could be an issue. Two gay JWs can be in good standing if they're not practicing homosexuals and live decent lives as JWs. Imagine if these two gay JWs are pioneers and secretly dated each other without any homosexual acts taking place. Then these two gay JWs approach the elders to get married. The only basis for the elders denying them would be the fact that they are against gay marriage. It might be an unlikely scenario. But I can see - I'm anxiously waiting and longing to see - two gay awake JWs doing this to expose Watchtower!

34

Tax-exempt Status of Churches and the Gay Marriage Decision

by lambsbottom in

jw
friends

it will be interesting to see what will happen with the "beloved" 501c3 tax exempt status which the churches hold so dearly onto.

the first-century christians met in homes.

they did not have exemption from taxes to the governments.

Island Man

I think that if the US Government started requiring churches that marry heterosexuals to also marry homosexuals then Watchtower would issue a new policy to the effect that henceforth, the organization no longer will be involved in any way shape or form in the carrying out of marriage ceremonies. They will say that the kingdom hall is a place of worship and instruction and not a marriage venue. They will say that Witnesses should make their own independent marriage arrangements, which can be in the form of a simple legal proceeding before a judge (but not in a church of christendom) attended by close friends. They will say that such a couple may choose to have an elder, who also happens to be a marriage officer, oversee the ceremony, and that on his own volition, he may choose to share scriptural advice on the subject of marriage, but that he would be acting on his own volition and is not to be construed as acting in the role as an elder of Jehovah's organization.

I predict this is what will happen if the US government requires churches that perform marriages to marry gay couples - Watchtower will simply opt out of involvement in marriages, period. Can the govt. force a church that gives religious reasons for not performing any marriages period, to perform gay marriages?

3

There's something very bizarre about Watchtower's use of the word pioneer.

by Island Man in

i have researched the meaning of the word pioneer in a number of online references.

none of the meanings seem to match watchtower's use of the word.

the word refers to persons who are trailblazers; persons who are the first to settle new territory; persons who initiate some new field or technology.. jws' use of the term to refer to publishers who spend a long time preaching every month, does not in the slightest bit, match the definition.

Island Man

I have researched the meaning of the word pioneer in a number of online references. None of the meanings seem to match Watchtower's use of the word.

The word refers to persons who are trailblazers; persons who are the first to settle new territory; persons who initiate some new field or technology.

JWs' use of the term to refer to publishers who spend a long time preaching every month, does not in the slightest bit, match the definition.

Now I could see the word being used to refer to missionaries going to a land where there are no JWs, to start the preaching work there and eventually form the first congregation. The term pioneer would legitimately match such missionaries as they would be the first to establish the JW religion in that land.

But to call JWs who preach a specific high quota of hours per month, pioneers, is just blatantly dishonest. It's like they've essentially invented a completely new and unrelated meaning to an existing word in the English language!

What's the basis for Watchtower's use of the word pioneer in this way?