Posts by Island Man

60

How Do You Answer Someone Who Says JWs Are Not False Prophets?

by minimus in

jw
friends

it used to bother me that people would say that about my well meaning religion.

how do you prove that witnesses are indeed, false prophets?.

Island Man

This is a subject that has come up often on Yahoo Answers.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20140524052943AAYDs9v

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20140709120223AATSwt0

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20140831000159AACV2LO

JWs typically respond to the charge by using ridiculous technicalities to fudge the definition of what it means to be a false prophet. Their responses are typically as follows:

~ They would say that they never came up with any original predictions but were only explaining existing prophecies in the bible. In other words for them to be accused of being false prophets they have to come up with a completely original prediction that's not based on anything in the bible. Of course this argument is ridiculous. The bible does not give such technicalities as a basis for excusing some from being guilty of false prophesy. Also at Luke 21:8 Jesus indicated that persons would come in his name and make false predictions about the timing of the end. Such persons are obviously not making original predictions because the bible speaks about the end. And given that they come in Jesus name it stands to reason that they profess to be christian and would likely base their bogus predictions on existing bible prophecies by twisting scriptures. Thus Luke 21:8 implicitly invalidates this particular technicality.

~ They would say that they never made their predictions in the name of Jehovah, that they never said 'these are the words of Jehovah...' or something to that effect. But does a prophet have to explicitly spell this out? If a prophet deliberately gives his audience the impression that his message is coming from God, while not explicitly saying so, is he any less guilty of speaking in God's name? The Watchtower has repeatedly and indisputably given the impression to readers that what they print is not coming from men but from God. There are statements in the literature about "God's direction through his Word and Organization" which convey the idea that the Organization's teachings and direction is coming from God and not from men. There have been bogus claims that Jehovah is the writer/editor of the Watchtower and no man's opinions are found in the literature. There is the claim that the organization is spirit directed, thus ascribing the organization's actions and teachings as being the work of God through holy spirit. To this day, elders and other representatives of the organization can be heard speaking of the direction coming from the organization as coming from Jehovah. At the recent annual meeting one Governing Member, while speaking about all the changes taking place in the organization, was heard saying that even the Governing Body has trouble keeping up with Jehovah's Chariot. What was he implying? He was implying that the changes are not coming from men - not from the Governing Body - but from Jehovah himself. All of the foregoing examples show that Watchtower implicitly claims to act in Jehovah's name. They implicitly ascribe all their doings as the doings of Jehovah. It is therefore disingenous for JWs to claim that their false predictions were'nt made in Jehovah's name. Hypocritically, Watchtower understands that baptizing someone in Jesus' name does not involve having to explicitly say 'I baptize you in Jesus' name' when immersing the person. So how is it they don't apply similar logic to making predictions in Jehovah's name? Shouldn't they see that it's also possible to implicitly make false predictions in God's name without explicitly spelling it out?

One of the most damning indicators of Watchtower's guilt as a false prophet is their own Reasoning Book. Just read through their section on false prophets and see how they conveniently invent their own rules of what it means to be a false prophet - rules that conveniently omit focusing on the aspect of making false predictions. It is very telling that throughout that entire section, not once is the very pertinent Deuteronomy 18:21,22 discussed! Why did they avoid those verses? Because they know they fit the bible's description of false prophets and so they didn't dare discuss those verses. In desperation they had to concoct their own definition and rules so as to hide their own guilt.

51

Deposition of Richard Ashe

by truthseekeriam in

jw
friends

http://watchtowerdocuments.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/lopez-11exhibit-8-to-dec-of-copley-iso-opp-to-plnts-mfs.pdf.

did any of you guys sit down and read this??

it's long but i assure you it's a great read.. .

Island Man

"Really, they have files on murder?"

Sure they do. Just take a read of this letter Watchtower sent to a body of elders . . .

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

30

"You can't believe anything science says, they're always changing their minds.."

by disposable hero of hypocrisy in

jw
friends

i know this is going to come up in a conversation shortly, how would you respond to this?

i've had it said to me before, specifically about health, one week wine/eggs/milk/axle grease is good for you, next week it's not..

Island Man

I did an OP some time ago contrasting the wisdom of the scientific community with the folly of the religious community:

"Jesus prayed that all his followers be united as one. But we see christianity divided into thousands of denominations. This division is partly due to the fact that the book that christianity claims is the truth, the inspired word of a supremely wise God, was not written in a sufficiently unambiguous manner as to make its one true meaning indisputably clear throughout.

By contrast take a field of science - say physics. How many different brands/versions/sects/denominations of physics are there? One! Barring respectful differences of opinion among physicists on matters not yet clearly understood, the field of physics is united. Physicists don't go off forming their own 'church' of followers resulting in different denominations of physics being taught in schools. Physicists the world over are united on all the major teachings of the field that have been established though experimentation. What the universe reveals through testing and experimentation is unambiguous, provable, repeatable, demonstrably true. Are we to believe the same God who created this universe and its consistent, unambiguous laws was unable to also inspire a book whose meaning is similarly clear and unabiguous throughout?

Christianity condemns doubt and scrutiny of its teachings as a show of lack of faith and as trying to destroy the faith of others. Often, a christian who openly exposes a teaching of his church as being in error is branded as divisive and expelled - sometimes even shunned, as ex-JWs can attest to. Christianity claims to be about seeking truth but its behavior reveals that its leaders are really about maintaining their power and their traditions. Christianity's inflexible and unreasonable demand of unquestioning conformity to tradition - even those not explicitly taught in scripture - often results in friction and conflict that leads to honest-hearted truth seekers being expelled and going off to form their own denomination, thus compounding the division in christianity.

By contrast, science welcomes doubt and scrutiny of its theories. Working to disprove a theory is seen as a good thing. It is precisely because of such scrutiny that scientific knowledge has increased and been refined. The scrutiny inherent in the scientific process serves to filter truth from error. Science does not condemn scrutiny of its theories - it feeds on it and grows as a result - because science is genuinely about seeking truth - not preserving the power of a particular leader or organization. Scientists respectfully have different hypotheses on matters not yet clearly understood or proven one way or the other. They don't let let their differening views on such matters divide them into different denominations that condemn each other.

Christianity seeks to unite followers through obedience to an ecclesiastical authority of one kind or another. Many christian denominations claim that without such centralized authority or organization there would be division and God's will (such as having the good news preached in all the inhabited earth) could not be successfully accomplished. The top down approach is employed where teachings flow from the central authority down to the followers. The irony is that such authorities are the ones that often foment divisions.

By contrast, science has no one central hierarchy demanding adherence to its theories. What unites scientists is truth itself. When a hypothesis is demonstrated through experimentation to be true, scientists the world over can't help but be united in agreement based on the hard facts proven through math and experimentation. This isn't to say that there aren't authorities in the field of science. There are multiple universites and other bodies that set standards and rules for research etc. But there is no one central body that seeks to impose its theories on others by pulling rank. There is no 'faithful and discreet experimenter' appointed to give hypotheses in due season which must be accepted by all without question. There is no magisterium. Knowledge flows from the bottom up - from individual scientists and researchers who prove their hypothesis to the universities and other bodies that publish them.

I find these stark contrasts between science and christianity to be very revealing. Didn't Jesus say that wisdom is proved righteous by its works? So compare the fruitage of science re unity and getting at the truth with the fruitage of christianity. How is it that christianity - a system professing belief in an allwise God of order - can be so divided, whereas another system that professes no belief in God can be so united? For me this comparison reveals exactly who is in error and stupidity and who is in truth and prudence. Science puts christianity to shame!"

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/280216/1/The-stark-contrast-between-Science-and-Christianity-says-it-all

30

"You can't believe anything science says, they're always changing their minds.."

by disposable hero of hypocrisy in

jw
friends

i know this is going to come up in a conversation shortly, how would you respond to this?

i've had it said to me before, specifically about health, one week wine/eggs/milk/axle grease is good for you, next week it's not..

Island Man

Disposable, that statement is so something that an elder I know would say. LOL.

15

Jehovah's Witnesses child abuse and judical comittees, YLE TV1 News 11/1/2014

by tunnistaja.ee in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnoslbdatzc.

.

Island Man

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

15

Jehovah's Witnesses child abuse and judical comittees, YLE TV1 News 11/1/2014

by tunnistaja.ee in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnoslbdatzc.

.

Island Man

[DUPLICATE POST]

39

why didnt God just do this?

by sowhatnow in

for one thing, i cant get past genesis, but no matter.. when god told adam and eve if you eat from the tree youll die.

so why did he not simple let them die and not allow the offspring to?.

you see, if i was a god, and i told two people that, id let them die , .

Island Man

"This snake could talk, but possibly all snakes could, at least before they were cursed"

And they evidently had legs too, which they only lost after they were cursed.

It is clear that the Genesis account was designed to provide answers to questions that ancient people thought about. Questions like:

~ Why do women have painful childbirth?

~ Why do men subjugate women?

~ Why do people grow old and die?

~ Why do men have one less rib than women?

~ Why do snakes crawl on their belly instead of having legs?

~ Why are people ashamed of their nakedness and wear clothes?

~ Why do rainbows appear in rainclouds?

~ Why do people speak different languages?

This kind of literature that seeks to provide mythical answers to the origins of certain phenomena is not unique to Genesis. This kind of writing is found throughout the ancient world.

6

Can you imagine what that would be like?

by cookiemaster in

hey guys, here's something to think about.

in my country there's a small town of a few thousands people were most people are jws.

can you image what's like living there?

Island Man

The movie Pleasantville comes to mind.

6

Can you imagine what that would be like?

by cookiemaster in

hey guys, here's something to think about.

in my country there's a small town of a few thousands people were most people are jws.

can you image what's like living there?

Island Man

The movie Pleasantville comes to mind.

4

why we do not have to read the bible daily,

by sowhatnow in

or for that matter at all, from my perspective ,.

the only place in the bible that there is a mentioning of reading something [in an undertone day and night] [that i can find].

is in the hebrew scritures.

Island Man

I wouldn't say christians aren't to read the bible at all.

2 Timothy 3:15,16 makes the point that the bible makes one wise for salvation and fully equips one. So a bible-believing christians would not want to omit to read the bible.

2 Peter 3:2 admonishes christians to remember what was previously spoken by the prophets as well as Jesus' commands given through the apostles. A christian would certainly want to refresh his memory on these matters by reading them in the bible periodically.

James 1:22-25 stresses the need to diligently apply what God's word says. That would certainly mean having to "peer into it" or study it. So there is no getting around the fact that christians ought to read - no, study - the bible.

But you would notice that James 1 talks about "hearing" the word of God and not "reading" it. I think the reason for this, and the reason for the absence of statements explicitly telling christians to "read" the bible, has to do with the fact that there were relatively few complete copies of the bible back then. Or, to put it another way, the average christian did not have a personal copy of the bible. That was a time before the invention of mass-printing and all copies of the bible had to be reproduced by hand - a time-consuming and expensive task. Thus only the religous leaders and some wealthy individuals had personal copies of the scriptures in their entirety. So the people depended on the religous leaders to read the scriptures to them at their weekly visit to the temple or synagogue. The situation was likely similar for early christians of the first century. They probably had a communal bible that was read from at congregation meetings. Few christians would have had personal copies. This is why Timothy was exhorted to apply himself to public reading at 1 Timothy 4:13; and this is why James 1:22 talks about hearing the word God. I'm saying all of this to say that the absence of explicit statement telling christians to read the bible is owing to the logistical reality of the times when personal copies of the bible were the exception. It's not owing to the reading of the bible being unnecessary (for they did have to "read" it with their ears when they attended meetings).

Having said all of that, I think that JWs take an almost superstitious view of the importance of reading the bible daily. Unless you're an ancient king or judge who has to be ever on guard as to what the law says, you probably don't need to read the bible daily. JWs see reading the bible as a spiritual end in and of itself and read the bible for the sake of reading it, as if the mere act of reading the bible makes them holy or righteous in God's eyes. There is the goal of reading the whole bible in a year by reading so many chapters a day. Is that really a worthy goal? Is it wise to read all the bible in a year just so you can claim to have read all the bible? So you see it becomes all about accomplishing a feat and reading the bible becomes an end in and of itself instead of the means to an end. Reading the bible becomes a legalistic religious work to make one feel righteous - all while they are distracted from what should be the ultimate reason and benefit from reading the bible. So JWs have a similar attitude to completing chapters in the bible as they have to counting hours in the ministry.