Posts by Island Man

66

The wt has now changed Jesus definition of neighboor

by poopie in

jw
friends

the man asked jesus who is my neighbor jesus stated the one who acts mercifully toward other humans.

not good enough for watchtower neighbor must fit in three catagories only according to yesterdays wt wow changed the words of the son of god.

Island Man

Marriage mates, family members, then anyone one might meet in the ministry….which covers all human beings.

Why limit it to people you meet in the ministry? Why not just say anyone you have opportunity to interact with?

By specifically saying those one might meet in the ministry, Watchtower is giving JWs cause to justify not participating in soup kitchens or offering other kinds of charitable assistance to people other than preaching to them.

What I mean is this. If a more reasonable and genuine JW were take a Saturday off from the ministry to volunteer at a soup kitchen and another JW later asks him why he didn't see him in service Saturday, the conversation could go something like this:

Watchtower JW: Hey, I didn't see you out in field service last Saturday. Were you sick?

Noble-Minded JW: No, not at all. I just took a Saturday off from field service to volunteer at the local soup kitchen. My heart goes out to those poor homeless people I see on the street. So I try to take some time off from time to time to be like the good samaritan and help my neighbor in need.

Watchtower JW: It's good that you show concern for you neighbor. But the greatest help you can offer them is to share the good news of the kingdom with them. That leads to everlasting life under God's kingdom, which will solve all their problems, including giving them food and shelter. We need to show love for neighbor by helping them to put their trust in God's kingdom as the only solution to their problems - not vain human efforts.

Noble-Minded JW: Yes, but Jesus didn't just teach people. He also offered them practical help like feeding them and healing their illnesses.

Watchtower JW: That's different, Jesus was performing miracles to prove he was the Messiah and to demonstrate to the people what God's kingdom, with him as King, will do on a larger scale in the future.

Noble-Minded JW: Well, the good Samaritan didn't preach to the beaten up, left-for-dead Jew. He didn't tell him to trust in God to solve his problems and leave him lying there. He lovingly offered his time and resources to bring him relief and Jesus said we should be doing the same to our neighbor.

Watchtower JW: Do you remember that study article we looked at in the Watchtower a few weeks ago that talked about showing love for your neighbor? I invite you to go look at it again carefully. See who the faithful and discreet slave is telling us our neighbor is. It says our family and marriage mate and people we meet in our ministry. See the illustration on the first page of the article - the one with the brother helping the people dig out their stalled vehicle. Why is the brother dressed that way? Was it not because he was in the ministry. Think of the great witness he gave to the vehicle owners. Because he was out preaching they know that it was a Jehovah's Witness that helped them, and he no doubt used the opportunity to explain to them that the reason why he helped them is because he is one of Jehovah's Witnesses. So the faithful slave is helping us to see that in the modern day application the neighbors that we are to help is people we encounter in our ministry.

46

Evolution a Fact - Agreed but So What?

by LAWHFol in

in many debates between believers and non believers (nb), the nb uses evolution as some sort of proof to support the non existence of god.. i agree that evolution is a fact, however i feel that evolution is proof of some sort of benevolent original cause.. if i were to create an a.i.

, i would program into it the ability to self-refactor and evolve.. i would also randomly inject viruses into the program (evil) where the a.i.

would be forced to stretch its current capabilities & modify it's operating functions in order to get through the random virus, and continue living.. with a steady flow of different viruses, the a.i.

Island Man

the model was absent of any ideas for or against a creator

Probably because it is inappropriate and unprofessional - not to mention controversial - to bring up religion in a science class. It speaks more to the culture of tolerance and political correctness than the scientific academia giving equal credence to a creator and evolution.

34

"There will be earthquakes...."

by Fisherman in

given: the prophecy is true.. what did jesus mean?

i have an app that alerts me of any earthquake all over the world.

since i got the app, it is one earthquake after another all over the world.

Island Man

What Bobcat said. JWs and others are doing exactly what Jesus was telling his disciples not to do!

29

What's next?

by Grey Goose in

jw
friends

hi everyone.. thanks for the welcome a few days ago, it was nice to hear your support.. this is a pure speculation thread, but what do you think the next changes are going to be?.

will we see tything come into play?.

more evangelical style meetings?.

Island Man

A nightly world news program on JW broadcasting. I think it's just a matter of time. Also, I think they're going to eventually stop printing one magazine each month and switch to printing a 32-page quarterly (once every 3 months). That way they can further reduce their printing costs while producing a product that looks more respectable and substantive.

31

The GB know it's all lies and wants to dismantle the WTS ... then what?

by Simon in

so imagine the gb have a sudden attack of honesty and realize "crap, this whole thing is lies - we're not god's spokespeople at all !".

how do you dismantle a religion that has +8 million members in a responsible way?

you can't just publish a watchtower saying "we were wrong" because that would be irresponsible - you need to let people down gently, put people off gradually.

Island Man

Pull off a Worldwide Church of God apology and reformation?

27

You Are Unsuitable!

by Divergent in

jw
friends

today's text -.

sunday, january 24. they collected the fine ones into containers, but the unsuitable they threw away.—matt.

13:48.. understanding the lesson of this illustration helps us to avoid being overly distraught or disappointed if a bible student or one of our children does not make the truth his own.

Island Man

So I am labelled "unsuitable" based on my refusal to follow a cult ... which has misinterpreted the Bible

Speaking of which, their interpretation of this very text is a blatant misinterpretation. The text is obviously referring to the final judgment and destruction of the wicked and preservation of the righteous at the very end of "the system of things".

46

Starlight in a Young Universe

by Perry in

the scientific method begins with a faith statement called a hypothesis, and then goes on to look for evidence, for or against support of the faith statement.. secular materialists often change their ideas on exactly how things have made themselves, but never whether they did.. the manifesto for this self imposed mental ban seems to be summed up by geneticist richard lewontin:.

‘our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural.

we take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.. it is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.

Island Man

Regarding your Richard Lewontin quote. There is a reason why scientists are committed to materialism - it's testable and it works. You can't say the same for mythology and superstition.

Richard Lewontin was basically saying that we cannot give up sound Math and Science - no matter how counter-intuitive the conclusions - to accept fanciful, unproven and unprovable myths and superstitions. Reality always trumps make-believe.

46

Starlight in a Young Universe

by Perry in

the scientific method begins with a faith statement called a hypothesis, and then goes on to look for evidence, for or against support of the faith statement.. secular materialists often change their ideas on exactly how things have made themselves, but never whether they did.. the manifesto for this self imposed mental ban seems to be summed up by geneticist richard lewontin:.

‘our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural.

we take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.. it is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.

Island Man

The Scientific Method begins with a faith statement called a hypothesis

Wrong. A hypothesis is not comparable to a faith statement.

A hypothesis is an idea put forward as a possible explanation for a phenomenon. The idea is then subjected to tests designed to disprove it.

A faith statement is a claim put forward as truth that must be accepted with confidence and not doubted. Attempting to disprove a faith claim is seen by theists as a bad thing and theists will often reject any evidence disproving a faith claim.

Sorry, but comparing a hypothesis to a faith claim is just ridiculous.

46

Starlight in a Young Universe

by Perry in

the scientific method begins with a faith statement called a hypothesis, and then goes on to look for evidence, for or against support of the faith statement.. secular materialists often change their ideas on exactly how things have made themselves, but never whether they did.. the manifesto for this self imposed mental ban seems to be summed up by geneticist richard lewontin:.

‘our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural.

we take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.. it is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.

Island Man

The Scientific Method begins with a faith statement called a hypothesis

Wrong. A hypothesis is not comparable to a faith statement.

A hypothesis is an idea put forward as a possible explanation for a phenomenon. The idea is then subjected to tests designed to disprove it.

A faith statement is a claim put forward as truth that must be accepted with confidence and not doubted. Attempting to disprove a faith statement is seen by theists as a bad thing and theists will often reject any evidence disproving a faith statement. A faith statement is almost antithetical to a scientific hypothesis. Just about the only thing they have in common is that they're both statements.

Sorry, but comparing a hypothesis to a faith statement is just ridiculous.

46

Starlight in a Young Universe

by Perry in

the scientific method begins with a faith statement called a hypothesis, and then goes on to look for evidence, for or against support of the faith statement.. secular materialists often change their ideas on exactly how things have made themselves, but never whether they did.. the manifesto for this self imposed mental ban seems to be summed up by geneticist richard lewontin:.

‘our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural.

we take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.. it is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.

Island Man

The Scientific Method begins with a faith statement called a hypothesis

Wrong. A hypothesis is not comparable to a faith statement.

A hypothesis is an idea put forward as a possible explanation for a phenomenon. The idea is then subjected to tests designed to disprove it.

A faith statement is a claim put forward as truth that must be accepted with confidence and not doubted. Attempting to disprove a faith statement is seen by theists as a bad thing and theists will often reject any evidence disproving a faith statement. A faith statement is almost antithetical to a scientific hypothesis. Just about the only thing they have in common is that they're both statements.

Sorry, but comparing a hypothesis to a faith statement is just ridiculous.