Posts by Island Man

6

Loss of Tax exemption for Australian religious organizations

by defender of truth in

i have no clue when it comes to australian politics, but these articles got my interest.could this be the start of something?...it would take too much space to quote them all, but please read each one in order.

it might make more sense, what i am getting at.it seems to me that the debate we no doubt all want to see happen: 'why do religions, those who don't do any community work except advancing their own religion, get tax exemption?

', could be coming soon.or maybe i am wrong?www.crikey.com.au/2016/04/05/essential-voters-want-to-dump-religious-tax-exemption/http://m.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/tax-exemption-for-religious-groups-should-end-poll/2994952/http://m.theage.com.au/comment/easter-is-a-good-time-to-revisit-taxexempt-status-of-religious-organisations-20160323-gnpzjj.html^^ note who wrote the article, it says at the end.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/australian_sex_party^^ yes, the above is actually a real political party.

Island Man

All I have to say to the Sex Party's proposal is: Yes ... yes ... yes ... give it to us ... yes ... ahhh ...

40

I went to see my Dr about the blood card issue

by purrpurr in

i booked a double appointment so that she wouldn't be rushed.

i explained that i'd been brought up in the jw's and woken up to what a load of shite it was.

i explained that they have changed the blood card and that the elders in the cong are being told to effectively force people into signing it.

Island Man

purrpurr I think your doctor may be confusing JWs with Mormons. Mormons are known for their past racist policy of not allowing black people to join the priesthood. Many people often confuse JWs with Mormons due to the fact that both groups share the common trait of going door to door.

20

Lurking JWs: Do people really need to know and use the word "Jehovah" or other language equivalents, to truly know God?

by Island Man in

watchtower puts forth the argument that you can't really know god unless you know and use the appellation "jehovah" or its equivalent in other languages.

is this really true?

i say it's not true and i will demonstrate to you why.. god's name is not a mere label that we have to use to communicate with him so that he knows we're talking to him.

Island Man

Here's an interesting scripture that applies to JWs and the issue of them judging others as not being christians because they don't use "Jehovah":

"Who are you to judge the house servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for Jehovah can make him stand." - Romans 14:4

This verse is full of irony when applied to JWs' judgmental attitude on the use of the word "Jehovah". By saying persons aren't true christians if they don't use "Jehovah", JWs are actually denying the meaning of God's name! How so?

Look at what the last sentence in the verse says: "he will be made to stand, for Jehovah can make him stand."

In other words, Jehovah - He that causes to become - can cause those who don't use the word "Jehovah" to be standing as true christians. But by saying you can't be a true christian if you're not using "Jehovah", JWs are denying God's ability to cause such ones to be standing. They are saying the lack of usage of the name "Jehovah" is greater than what the name stands for. They are paradoxically denying the meaning of the name of God in their quest to promote the use of "Jehovah". LOL.

20

Lurking JWs: Do people really need to know and use the word "Jehovah" or other language equivalents, to truly know God?

by Island Man in

watchtower puts forth the argument that you can't really know god unless you know and use the appellation "jehovah" or its equivalent in other languages.

is this really true?

i say it's not true and i will demonstrate to you why.. god's name is not a mere label that we have to use to communicate with him so that he knows we're talking to him.

Island Man

Watchtower puts forth the argument that you can't really know God unless you know and use the appellation "Jehovah" or its equivalent in other languages. Is this really true? I say it's not true and I will demonstrate to you why.

God's name is not a mere label that we have to use to communicate with him so that he knows we're talking to him. God can read hearts and will know that a worshiper is addressing him even if that worshiper does not use a form of the word "Jehovah". For example, the gospels show that Jesus never directly addressed God in prayer with the name "Jehovah". He always addressed him as "Father". So one does not need to use the name "Jehovah" for God to know that he is addressing Him.

Also, it is often not necessary to use "Jehovah" to distinguish him from other gods when conversing with others about which god you worship. Unlike ancient times when polytheism was rampant and worshipers of "Jehovah" were in the minority, the world today has a very high percentage of theists that worship "Jehovah" (the god of the bible) and one often only needs to use the word "God" or say he is christian for others to know which god he worships.

So really, the labeling and distinguishing functions of the name is not as important as JWs make it out to be. So what about the name is important? It has to be the meaning of the name. Since God's name has a descriptive meaning, then God's name is actually a description of who he is. Therefore knowing god's name is really about knowing who god is - his character or nature as described by the meaning of the name. So look at this:

"Jehovah" means "He Causes to Become" and Watchtower says it alludes to the fact that God causes himself or his creations to become whatever he wishes so that his will can be accomplished. Think about that meaning for a while. Can you think of any words or titles that encompasses the meaning of the name? Of course you can! "Creator". Doesn't a creator quite literally cause things to become? What about the term "Almighty" or "All-Powerful"? Do these not also convey the impression of one who has the power to do anything - to cause anyone or anything to become anything he desires? Really, the expression "He Causes to Become" is just a fancy way of saying "He that does things", "He that makes things", "the Prime Causer", "the living God", "the active God" - the God that actually has the power to do things and cause things to happen, unlike the other lifeless idol gods, etc.

Now honestly ask yourself this question: Does a person have to know the word "Jehovah" and it's meaning, in order to know these things about the God of the bible? If a person studied a modern KJV that uses "LORD" and omits "Jehovah", would he not still learn from it that God is Almighty, Creator, Prime Causer? Would he not still learn that God has the power to cause anyone or anything to become whatever desires it or them to become? So you see a person does not have to know the word "Jehovah" to know God's name - to know that God causes to become. For the very name of God is demonstrated by his dealings recorded in the bible. So everyone who is familiar with any bible unavoidably comes to know God's name whether or not the bible contains the word "Jehovah"!

So really, JWs are making a big fuss over the use of a label - the meaning of which is known by virtually all bible-reading christians even without them having to know the actual label, for the whole bible reveals the name of God and so it is foolish to claim that persons don't know God's name, just because they don't know the word "Jehovah". It's shallow, legalistic thinking on the part of the JWs. They focus on telling people to know and use a word when the very persons already know the essence and meaning of that word even without literally knowing the word itself.

So when non-JW christians use titles like "God", "Father" and "Lord", and in their hearts ascribe to these titles the same connotations of "Almighty", "Prime Causer", etc, and think of him as someone who has the power to cause anyone or anything to become whatever he desires - aren't they actually using God's name in their hearts, to the extent that they know the meaning of the name and ascribe it to a label? Think about it.

33

Christians Know Who God Is

by Loi_241 in

many of us christians have a good question for you to ask, “who is god?” there are more than six scriptures to share with you.

you know the bible itself a true message for all the people on earth.

the bible explains ‘in the beginning god created everything: heaven, earth, animals, people and everything.’ thus, you notice god created humans, adam and eve.

Island Man

The OP makes a number of very unconvincing and unsubstantiated assertions. Very typical of religious folk.

13

Would crime rate go up if we were 100% positive this is the only life???

by James Mixon in

no resurrection, no 70 virgins, no 7 millions jw's living for thousand of years, no coming.

back as dog or cat you are dead and done..

Island Man

No.

Scandinavian countries have some of the highest percentages of atheists, of all countries in the world. But their crime rate is one of the lowest.

Most humans are good people. Religious persons who sincerely believe that fear of God is the only thing holding people back from anarchy - those religious persons are inherently lawless and immoral persons who know that they themselves are only being good because of fear of God and they are projecting their own lawless predispositions unto the rest of society.

20

A Sincere Question Regarding Macroevolution

by jacobm in

jw
friends

i have a sincere question related to macroevolution:.

microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species.

despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change:.

Island Man

Google "Ring Species".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvYpBi7HG9k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb6Z6NVmLt8

"Have scientists ever been able to recreate or virtually witness a Macroevolution type jump that "transcends the boundaries of a single species"?"

There are no jumps from one species to another. The transition from one species to another is extremely gradual spanning multiple generations. The best way I can think of illustrating it is to imagine the brightness of the sky at midday and at midnight as being two different species. Now imagine each second of time from midday to midnight as being one generation of the species in the process of evolution. There is no single second of time that jumps from midday to midnight. Rather, there are multiple seconds of time between the two. Also each second of daylight leads to another second of daylight. No single second spans the transition from night to day. It's an extremely gradual transition whose dynamics cannot be perceived by the human eye viewing it in real time. Evolution is like that. Each generation of the transition is able to reproduce with the generation immediately before it - they are always of the same species. But "final" generation would not be able to reproduce with the original generation. They are as different as midnight from midday.

So when creationists say that they believe micro-evolution but not macro-evolution, it's as if they're saying: 'I believe one second of afternoon daylight leads to another second of very very very slightly less bright afternoon daylight. But I don't believe that the brightness of midday eventually turns to the darkness of midnight. The idea is utterly ridiculous!'

LOL.

28

UFO's might be real.and what does it mean if they are?

by atomant in

for some reason this subject has not received much attention over the years which surprises me.theres many conspiracy theories floating around on the internet and lve done my fair share of due diligence on the matter.the school is still out on this one.l find it very hard to believe humans are the only intelligent beings out there.has anyone on this forum ever seen a ufo or experienced a close encounter?

Island Man

I don't think E.T life will pose a huge problem for JWs. After all, there's tons of evidence proving evolution and still JWs continue by ignoring and denying the evidence.

E.T. life contradicts nothing in the bible. The bible is absolutely silent about it. If ET life were discovered, Watchtower can easily claim that it is part of Jehovah's creation created during the period mentioned at Genesis 1:1. They can say the bible is not an astrobiology text book but was written specifically to man addressing spiritual matters pertinent to man.

Alternatively, they can claim that it's all a grand deception by demons. They can say that aliens are demons in disguise here to mislead and distract us from God's kingdom, which is the only hope for mankind. They might even claim that Jehovah created aliens perfect on other worlds but those who are visiting us are rebels who joined with satan and the demons and are here to mislead us.

I don't see the discovery of ET life crushing the JW worldview. It would only force Watchtower to tweak it with "new light". If evolution hasn't crushed Watchtower I don't see ET life doing it.

33

2016-4-4-BOE!--Scanning and Sending Medical Records through Emails!

by Atlantis in

i was always under the impression that only "licensed" persons had the authority to do this.. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

2016-4-4-boe scanning and sending medical records through emails!.

.. this is the last paragraph of the main body of the boe without the top and bottom, which revealed the congregation and information which could expose our source.. .. "therefore, brothers, i appeal to you to make sure that a copy of the new add for every publisher is kept in alphabetical order, perhaps using an a-z filing system to expedite it's location and so that it can be kept neat, clean and legible for scanning and emailing for up to 4 years, after which a new copy should be completed.

Island Man

I don't know. The writing style in this paragraph does not seem characteristic of something that would come from Watchtower. I doubt Watchtower would write:

It is also essential that when the secretary is away from his congregation...

No, they would write something like:

If the secretary is away from the congregation or unable to carry out his duties...

The beginning of the paragraph says "I appeal to you" as if the letter is coming from an individual. Letters from Watchtower are always narrated with "we" or "the Governing Body" - never "I". But if it's a letter from a C.O. to a specific congregation he would not use the expression "away from his congregation" but speak of "the congregation" since a specific congregation is being spoken of and not multiple secretaries in multiple respective congregations.

I'm doubting the authenticity of this BOE paragraph. It doesn't read right. it lacks Watchcraft.

8

While JWs in the 80s and 90s were attributing magic to demons...

by Island Man in

... pen and teller were showing people how it's really done.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pucaido2x4i.

but jws are not superstitious, no, no.

lol..

Island Man

... Pen and Teller were showing people how it's really done...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUcAido2x4I

But JWs are not superstitious, no, no. LOL.