Island Man

Joined

• started 138 topics
• posted 2,374 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Island Man

• 
  42

  Gross hypocrisy in September 15, 2015 Watchtower

  by Island Man in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ask any jw the question "why do jehovah's witnesses impose their views on others?

  we do not impose our views on anyone!".

  do you impose your views on others?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20150810135854AAkVLF5&ap=0&ans_success=1
  
• 
  42

  Gross hypocrisy in September 15, 2015 Watchtower

  by Island Man in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ask any jw the question "why do jehovah's witnesses impose their views on others?

  we do not impose our views on anyone!".

  do you impose your views on others?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  Wow! Thanks a million splash! I can't wait to use those memes on a Y!A question!
• 
  42

  Gross hypocrisy in September 15, 2015 Watchtower

  by Island Man in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ask any jw the question "why do jehovah's witnesses impose their views on others?

  we do not impose our views on anyone!".

  do you impose your views on others?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  It seems like the Watchtower art department gave us a wonderful gift in that image.
• 
  42

  Gross hypocrisy in September 15, 2015 Watchtower

  by Island Man in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ask any jw the question "why do jehovah's witnesses impose their views on others?

  we do not impose our views on anyone!".

  do you impose your views on others?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  Ask any JW the question "Why do Jehovah's Witnesses impose their views on others?" and you're likely to get a response along the lines of: "We do not impose our views on others. We share with persons what the bible has to say and leave it up to them to decide whether to accept our message or not. We do not impose our views on anyone!". But how exactly do JWs share their views with others? They go out of their way to visit people at their homes to share Watchtower literature with them and recommend that they accept a free home bible study. They recommend that persons adopt their spiritual world view and promote it as the only way to find true happiness, favor with God and the hope of eternal life on a future paradise earth. But all of that hard work to promote their beliefs, equipped with custom made literature and field service presentations delivered directly to people's homes does not constitute imposing their beliefs on others, the JWs would say.

  Now look at captioned photo on page 10 of the September 15, 2015 Watchtower:

  Do you impose your views on others? (see paragraph 9)

  

  
  

  Is it just me, or does the above picture not seem oddly reminiscent of two JWs offering tracts to someone? In fact a graphics artist can easily photoshop the above image by replacing the Raflexidine tracts with Watchtower tracts and no one would doubt that this image is an accurate reflection of JWs doing their preaching work!

  In fact I highly recommend that ex-JWs with the technical know-how do this to expose the Watchtower's hypocrisy. Just change the tracts in their hands to be Watchtower tracts and change the logo on the lady's bag to the blue JW.org logo and leave the caption that says: "Do you impose your views on others?". In fact it can be a double image with the original image above and altered image below. Have the caption above that says: "Do you impose your views on others?" then on the image itself there can be a big white meme text that says: "Can you spot the difference?". lol

  If Watchtower regards the efforts of these two individuals promoting a health brand as tantamount to imposing their views on others, then surely they cannot be blind to the fact that JWs are engaged in a similar work of imposing their religious views on others. Surely they cannot be that blind. They are such hypocrites!
  
• 
  21

  Why the Bible is a poor moral compass

  by Diogenesister in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  please don't click the link if you feel details of abuse would upset you http://jwleaks.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/letter-to-the-director-of-public-prosecutions-from-steven-unthank-in-relation-to-discontinuing-the-criminal-trial-february-2012-pdf.pdf.

  looking at some of the events that led up to the rc in australia i came across this letter, submitted to the d.p.p.

  by steven upthank, in relation to the crown discontinuing prosecution of the governing body of jehovahs witnesses.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  There was a wonderful example of the bible being a poor moral compass in this week's Watchtower study that highlighted Jesus' loving concern for those he miraculously healed.

  The account of the man "full of leprosy" brought out an interesting fact about how God directed lepers to be treated. One of the cited scriptures quoting the mosaic law stated that lepers had to live outside the camp isolated from the rest of the population; cry out "unclean! unclean!" if approaching non-lepers; had to tear their clothes; keep their hair disheveled and cover over their mustache. The bible thus commanded the ostracism, stigmatization and humiliation of lepers! How immoral!

  But leprosy is actually not a very contagious disease. It is contagious - but not VERY contagious. Thus the dehumanizing ostracism commanded by the law was excessive and unnecessary cruelty. Additionally, leprosy is very treatable today unlike some other diseases. This means that Jehovah could have easily revealed to the nation, some effective medical treatment to be given to lepers. Did he not say that he was making a great nation out of them and surrounding nations would marvel at them? So why couldn't Jehovah have commissioned the medical equivalent of Oholiab? Why couldn't he have revealed effective medical treatments to be used to treat leprosy? Instead he sanctioned their stigmatization and humiliation!
• 
  579

  Won't get fooled again ...Moon Landing.

  by The Rebel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so i was fooled by the witnesses.

  what can i learn from that?

  not to accept things at face value but to seek out opinion and different view points.. hence my question " do you believe man landed on the moon?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  I don't believe the moon landing was a hoax. Aside from all the evidence proving that man really did land on the moon is this one little common sense practicality aspect that is lost on the conspiracy theorists: It would actually have been easier to land men on the moon than to successfully fake landing them on the moon. Faking the moon landing with so many people involved and keeping it quiet would be a much more daunting feat than actually landing people on the moon.

  The Mark: NASA could have faked the manned part of the mission. In other words, send a spacecraft to orbit the moon a few times and come back. It would be difficult for Russia to really know if these were manned or not, especially once in the vicinity of the moon. So Russia knows that a spacecraft was sent to the moon but wouldn't be in a position to disprove if there was actually someone there or if they had landed.

  Why would NASA go through the trouble of sending a space craft all the way to the moon to orbit it to fake a moon landing? If they would go so far then why wouldn't they just put the men on the moon and be done with it? I mean, you make it sound like NASA had the obsessive psychotic goal of duping everyone just for the satisfaction of it, by not putting men on the moon while convincing everyone that they did - even at the cost of going through all the work and expense of sending actual spacecraft to the actual moon, which in itself proves that they were well within the capability of putting men on the moon in the first place! Is that reasonable? By way of illustration, it's like saying a man faked getting shot in his bullet proof vest by boring a hole in his vest, shooting a round in a barrel of water, retrieving the slug and positioning it into the hole he bored in his bullet proof vest - when it would have been a lot easier to just shoot the vest! Come on!!!
• 
  8

  It seems the Royal Commission has been adjourned for the day.

  by umbertoecho in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i have been to the website expecting to see the days commencement, but a note is there at the bottom saying this meeting has been adjourned for today.

  this was posted about 17 hours ago.. anyone else heard of this?.

  might give some people the opportunity to read through the transcripts.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  I just looked at the witness list for the public hearings and it appears that Mr. O'Brien was the last Witness. So it may be that the public hearings aspect of the investigation are over. I think the fact that Mr. O'Brien was the highest ranking JW in Australia is also indicative that the public hearings may be over. The pattern was that they started first with the victims then moved to the elders and up the chain of command to finally interviewing the Branch Coordinator.
• 
  8

  It seems the Royal Commission has been adjourned for the day.

  by umbertoecho in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i have been to the website expecting to see the days commencement, but a note is there at the bottom saying this meeting has been adjourned for today.

  this was posted about 17 hours ago.. anyone else heard of this?.

  might give some people the opportunity to read through the transcripts.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  At the ending of the last session - yesterday - his honor mentioned the possibility of reconvening next week. So it appears like there aren't any other sessions for the week.
• 
  9

  Feedback on RC from JW Friendly Site

  by konceptual99 in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  there has been some comment on the latest rc proceedings on that well know jw friendly site.. one set of posts has been particularly interesting as the poster related their own experience as an abuse victim when they were a child in the congregation.

  this of course took courage and the poster deserves no criticism at all for this.

  he is, however, still very supportive of the organisation.. this is his latest post:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  Whilst I have nothing but sympathy for his experiences I can't help wondering how someone who was abused and whose abuser was not sanctioned can have this much support for the organisation still.

  Knowing that most black Americans are christians despite the fact that the bible condones slavery and was used to justify the enslavement of their ancestors; and knowing the majority of christians are women despite the bible's misogynistic principles; I can fully appreciate how a sex abuse victim can turn to defending the organization that let his abuser go free without reporting him to the police.

  The answer is RELIGION = Reason Extinguished Leaving Ignorance, Gullibility, Insanity and Other Nonsense.
• 
  239

  Royal Commission Live Hearing Now

  by LostinJapan in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  wednesday 5 , day 7 live hearing.

  case study 29, july 2015, sydney.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Island Man

  When he said "absolutely!" he shook his head instead of nodding. That's a micro-expression that shows he's lying! His subconscious mind is shaking his head to say no, while his lips are saying yes. LOL