Posts by Island Man

33

Are Faith-based assertions falsifiable?

by braincleaned in

i say yes.. common statement from faith: creation proves that god is love.. false.. the circle of life proves the contrary.

love is not the basis for the carnage needed for survival.

any loving creator would have adapted vegetation to fit the needs of all species.. no blood.

Island Man

A clever satire on Intelligent Design:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v83X9-oJ-w&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PL1DA0C8985FAE1C22

310

How I recently handled JWs at my door

by Christian guy in

the jws stopped by my house a couple weeks ago on a saturday morning.

i knew that with others most likely waiting for them out in the car they probably did not then have much time to engage in any serious conversation.

so i let them talk while i feigned interest in what they had to say.

Christian guy, I must say that I'm quite impressed with the way you used good logic and scripture to expose the error of the JW message. I also like to use logic and scripture to point out their errors - that despite the fact that I'm an atheist. I humor the bible and bible based christianity to show the JWs that they aren't even correctly following the book they profess to follow. Some JWs find it odd that an atheist would use the bible to prove that JWs as false christians. Yet they would never voice similar criticism of their own Watchtower Society, in a brochure aimed at muslims, quoting from the Quran to support JW teachings.

Now that you are no longer a JW let me put on my atheist cap and come to the "defense" of another atheist to whom you said the following:

When I am convinced that you are sincerely looking for such evidence.

I consider the above quote to be quite revealing of the biased (as in confirmation bias) nature of the thinking that one has to entertain in order to see the weak arguments presented by theists as being valid evidence for their beleifs. You see, the idea of looking for evidence of something already implies that the mind has already developed a bias toward believing in that something. In such a mental state, one will accept faulty reasoning as hard corroborative evidence. A person really should not have to be sincerely looking for evidence of God's existence in order for such evidence to lead to that conclusion - if the evidence really is conclusive evidence. One should never approach truth-finding with a preconcieved conclusion or bias. For a true believer always finds "evidence" to support his belief. Every single one of the conflicting religions on earth can produce beleivers who would cite "evidence" for their particular beliefs. If one has to be sincerely willing to accept a conclusion as true in order to accept the evidence being presented as corroborating the conclusion, then already the rational and objective thinking required to accurately scrutinize the evidence has been compromised. Don't confuse objectively following facts that lead to a conclusion, with subjectively evaluating facts as to corroborate a bias. Atheists have done the former. Theists typically do the latter.

But welcome to JWN.

10

Do the Governing Body really consider themselves to be 'DOMESTICS' like the Great Crowd?

by LogCon in

jw
friends

" and so the great crowd and the annointed are all 'domestics'.

and brothers, we love this teaching.we love this idea because it really, truly does dignify members of the great crowd.".

some may feel, and understandably so, that the governing body is throwing crumbs to the great crowd.

Island Man

To paraphrase Animal Farm:

"Some Domestics are more equal than others."

39

I wonder...

by braincleaned in

i wonder about why so many of us stick to the "truth" within the frame of the jehovah's witness religion.. of course, the wts has authority over our minds thru the control of information, demonizing any "worldly" knowledge that might jeopardize our faith in this entity.. thru my own experience, i understand how we can stick to this organization; because of a life's investment in serving, and the close ties of family and peers we do not wish to abandon or upset.

so we are here on sites like these, to understand the mechanisms of the cult... to try to make sense of why we should stay, or why we should leave.. the consequences are too important to take this lightly, or too swiftly.. if i may share a bit of my journey, i did not have to worry too much about the cult at first, because my main battle was based deeper than that.

after all, the root of any christian religion is in the bible itself; faith in jehovah and christ; trust in the idea that the bible is inspired by god himself.. so yes, my quest went to the base, the root of the jw faith... the bible.. since childhood, the character of jehovah was a problem for me.

Island Man

I read enough on evolution to realize that the Borg has fed us with dishonest quote-mining and blatant lies on the subject. Reading it from the horse's mouth blew my mind! It was simply one of the best moments of my life.

That's exactly how I woke up about a year ago.

Why was I expected to have a double standard of understanding when it came to Jehovah? What logic was there that genocide, homophobia, jealousy, slavery, vengeance (to name a few) was ever acceptable?

JWs (and pretty much most Christians) seem to have sold out their inherent human morality and sense of justice for the sake of eternal personal gain - or to save themselves from eternal punishment. They will never express it in such blunt terms but that is what their defense of the indefensible atrocities of the OT ultimately boils down to. Because they believe God is the Creator of the universe and life, and most importantly, the one who can give them eternal life in the future, they are willing to humor his inhumane conduct and requirements and even stoop to using rather disingenous reasonings and twisting of scripture to gloss over his brutishness. "Well they weren't really slaves, the word "slave" was just a word for worker". "That account only looks harsh because you don't have all the details. Could there have been something more in Uzzah's heart that Jehovah saw why he struck him dead for just trying to steady the ark?" But isn't it funny how the God of the bible who supposedly inspired its writing, and who is supposed to be supremely wise , and who wants people to draw close to him, would do such a piss-poor job at PR by having his writers portray him as an exacting brute, by leaving out critical details necessary to see those harsh accounts in a better light? Where's his wisdom? ?????!

A perfect example of the low levels that the JW organization is willing to go, can be found in a recent public edition Watchtower (a year or two ago) where they refute the "myth" that God is vengeful. Can you believe that? They actually have the nerve to explicitly deny that the God of the bible is vengeful when their own bible makes it clear that he is vengeful. And how do they do it? By conveniently and implicitly redefining the meaning of the word vengeful. Unbelievable! I exposed this issue in a Y!A question, and you wouldn't believe the dishonest answers that the JWs gave:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130118121151AAMiCpD

20

Apostates with websites must have thick skin...

by ILoveTTATT in

jw
friends

i have a page on facebook and it made some controversial posts (my page is similar to the quotes website, except it translates the quotes to spanish).

i post that we believed in the cross before: meh... "thank you brother for showing us how the light has increased".

i post that we banned organ transplants and were against vaccinations: "you're an apostate!!

Island Man

ILoveTTATT, here's a nice old Watchtower quote for your page:

"If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now: But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. New light never extinguishes older light, but adds to it. If you were lighting up a building containing seven gas jets you would not extinguish one every time you lighted another, but would add one light to another and they would be in harmony and thus give increase of light. So is it with the light of truth; the true increase is by adding to, not by substituting one for another." - Watchtower Feb. 1, 1881, Reprints p. 188

14

Have you read C.T. Russell's controversial view of "new light"?

by Island Man in

"if we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now: but with god there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from god must be like its author.

a new view of truth never can contradict a former truth.

new light never extinguishes older light, but adds to it.

Island Man

"If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now: But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. New light never extinguishes older light, but adds to it. If you were lighting up a building containing seven gas jets you would not extinguish one every time you lighted another, but would add one light to another and they would be in harmony and thus give increase of light. So is it with the light of truth; the true increase is by adding to, not by substituting one for another." - Watchtower Feb. 1, 1881, Reprints p. 188

Controversial writings like the above, which expose the hypocrisy of the modern day JW organization, showing how it has morphed into something that Russell would never have approved of, is perhaps the reason why C.T. Russel is no longer a member of the faithful and discreet slave.

Practically speaking, the JW organization secretly and posthumously makes Russell out to be an apostate - albeit a well respected apostate whom they dare not openly expose as an apostate.

60

A one sentence reply that could jolt a JW

by HBH in

jw
friends

my mind was wandering last night, and i though of this as a reply to a jw.. "oh, your the people who believe 8 men in brooklyn, ny are directing the world's only true religion.".

the sentence is a fact that they can't deny, but clearly shows delusion.

any other one sentence "stingers"?.

Island Man

This could be a good way to get JWs thinking about how unreasonably strict they are in refusing life-saving blood transfusions:

First, you point out to them that in ancient Israel, sabbath observance was a very strict matter, punishable by death. I would site the example of the Moses-era Israelite who was stoned to death for picking up wood on the sabbath. I would also mention that the law even went so far as to forbid lighting a fire in your house on the sabbath day. (Exodus 35:3)

I would then ask them for their opnion on why the pharisees might have reasoned that it was wrong for Jesus to perfrom miracles on the sabbath. [Undoubtedly they would say that the pharisees regarded performing a miracle as a kind of work and the law stated that no work should be done on the sabbath]

Then you could ask them if they think the pharisees' reasoning was acceptable under the circumstances. [They would no doubt answer 'no', because the bible says Jesus was incensed at the insensibility of their hearts] When they answer no, ask them why (if they haven't already given a reason)

Then once they've correctly reasoned on the errors and insensibilities of the pharisees on the sabbath issue, even preferring someone suffer in their illness rather than be healed on the sabbath, you then ask them how the pharisees' reasoning on the sabbath issue is different to the organization's reasoning on the blood issue. Ask them why the same reasoning used to refute the pharisees' extremist and unreasonable interpretation of the sabbath law can't be used by others to refute JWs' interpretation of the abstain from blood doctrine, applying it to life-saving blood transfusions.

A simpler alternative could be to read that passage in the gospels where Jesus points to David and his men eating the showbread and remaining uncondemned even though Jesus himself explicitly says it was something not lawful to do. Then mention Jesus words about God wanting mercy and not sacrifice. Ask them to explain what that means and why it was ok for David to break the law under those circumstances and remain uncondemned. Then after they have explained themselves, ask them why their same explanation and reasoning can't be applied to accepting a life-saving blood transfusion.

29

Are the Gospels real history or myth?

by Island Man in

this lecture by dr. richard carrier will definitely give you something to think about (please note that the video is linked to start about half hour into the video which is when the lecture starts):.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=illdt2xhzw0&feature=player_detailpage#t=1659.

if the timing doesn't work just move the play head to the 27:00 mark.

Island Man

This lecture by Dr. Richard Carrier will definitely give you something to think about (please note that the video is linked to start about half hour into the video which is when the lecture starts):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILldt2XHZw0&feature=player_detailpage#t=1659

If the timing doesn't work just move the play head to the 27:00 mark. I think there is also a link in the video to jump to the start of the lecture.

10

The true religion of God, JW's follow Rutherford not Jesus, proof.

by Crazyguy in

when push come to shove dealing with witnesses or elders one could just say 'i follow christ and not the teaching of rutherford" of course the elders or whom ever your talking to will be shocked and wondering what the hell your talking about because we of course follow christ really?.

jesus; said in john chapter 6, 'one must eat of his flesh in order to have life'.

rutherford; "dont do it, only us anointed sons of god can" .

Island Man

Speaking about the timing of the establishment of the kingdom, Jesus said "It does not belong to YOU to get knowledge of the times or seasons which the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction". Rutherford: 'We know the time, it's 1914'.

Jesus, when speaking about the observance of God's sabbath, espoused the following principles: "I want mercy and not sacrifice" and "the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath". Rutherford's policy of having JWs die instead of accept a life-saving blood transfusion effectively espouses opposite principles: "I want sacrifice and not mercy" and "life was made for blood and not blood for life" (i.e. blood is more important than life).

But Luke 21:8 is a real kicker when you read it in the ESV:

"And he said, “See that you are not led astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he!’ and, ‘The time is at hand!’ Do not go after them. "

Jesus said not to go after those saying 'The Time is at Hand!'. C.T. Russell published a book of false end time predictions entitled . . . "The Time Is At Hand"!!!

15

Intervention of God in Babel and why allow suffering explication contradiction

by trackregister99 in

hello.. jehovah witnesses teaches that adam d ecided autonomous sovereignty and god choose let time elapse for demonstrate whether government is better: human government or divine government, allowing many suffering and blood in thousand years.. .

but, the human government received an intervention of god when he confused the languages ?

?at babel.

Island Man

A very excellent point! I will keep it in mind the next time I have opportunity to torment I mean speak with, a JW.